13.01. Generally.

• Court: Kansas

Kansas Workers Compensation Settlement Reporter 13.01. Generally SummariesChapter 1313.01 GenerallySee Also,Baldwin v. Professional Lawn Care Srvs., Docket No. 1,024,450. (December 2005) May 2003 (Ph) Claimant and Respondent signed a Voluntary Separation Agreement and Release of Claimant's retirement. Respondent agreed this release also covered any workers compensation claims claimant might bring. However, K.A.R. 51-21-1 prohibits any contract relieving respondent of liability in case of an accident. The release therefore does not work to relieve respondent of liability for claimant's bilateral carpal tunnel claim. Osborne v. Cessna Aircraft Company, Docket No. 1,007,674. December 2001 In a workers compensation proceeding, when only the nature and extent of disability is questioned by a respondent, Respondent has not forfeited the right to claim that the accident which was admitted did not cause the disability which is claimed. Webber v. Automotive Controls Corp. and ITT Hartford Insurance, ___ Kan. ___, 35 P.3d 788 (2001) (December 7, 2001). June 1999 (Ph) The issue dealing with respondent's total gross salary does constitute a jurisdictional defense under K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 44-534a(a)(2), as it goes directly to the compensability of the claimant's injury and the claim. Wolf v. Calendar Club, Docket No. 239,893. April 1999. (Ph) Misrepresentation of physical condition is not a defense to a claim for workers compensation benefits. Hamilton v. Arby's Roast Beef Restaurant, Docket No. 241,239. See alsoHamilton v. Arby's Roast Beef Restaurant, Docket No. 241,239 (July 1999), wherein respondent produced additional evidence to support its claim of misrepresentation and also argued the Court of Appeals in Ramirez v. Excel Corporation, Docket No. 80,670, Kan. App., rev. denied Kan. (1999), suggests that a misrepresentation made at the time of hiring will bar a workers compensation claim by an employee if there is a causal connection between the misrepresentation and the injury. However, the Board continued to hold that a misrepresentation made at the time of hiring does not bar a workers compensation claim even if the injury is causally related to that misrepresentation. The claimant is entitled to benefits if he suffered accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment and otherwise meets the criteria of...