In this underlying workers' compensation claim, the Maryland Workers' Compensation Commission (“Commission”) entered an Award of Compensation (“Award”) ordering the employer to pay for a medical evaluation and additional temporary disability benefits. The employer appealed that decision to the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. During the employer's case-in-chief, the employer presented medical expert testimony by way of a video deposition and then rested its case, without entering the Commission's Award into evidence. The Claimant moved for judgment, arguing that the employer failed to meet its burden to invoke jurisdiction of the circuit court by failing to move the Award into evidence. The trial court granted the Motion for Judgment, finding that Section 9-745 of the Labor and Employment Article makes the Commission's decision a piece of evidence that must be considered by a jury. Thereafter, the employer filed a Motion for New Trial, arguing it was not required to move the Award into evidence. The employer's Motion was denied and the employer appealed to the Court of Special Appeals.
The Court of Special Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, concluding that Section 9-745 does not require the appellant to move an Award into evidence. The Claimant petitioned the Court of Appeals for a writ of certiorari, which was granted to address the question of whether an appellant in a workers' compensation trial was required to move the Commission's decision into evidence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision below, holding that an appellant in a workers' compensation jury trial is not required to move the Commission's decision into evidence, and that a trial judge is required to give a jury instruction that encompasses the Commission's decision and explains that such decision is prima facie correct.
Luther Gales, III v. Sunoco, Inc. and American Zurich Insurance, 20132014 WL 5370657 (No. 99 September Term, 2013).