§
Subdivision 1.Disability, disablement.
The disablement of an employee resulting from an occupational disease shall be regarded as a personal injury within the meaning of the workers' compensation law.
§
Subd. 10.Multiple employers or insurers; liability.
The employer liable for the compensation for a personal injury under this chapter is the employer in whose employment the employee was last exposed in a significant way to the hazard of the occupational disease. In the event that the employer who is liable for the compensation had multiple insurers during the employee's term of employment, the insurer who was on the risk during the employee's last significant exposure to the hazard of the occupational disease is the liable party. Where there is a dispute as to which employer is liable under this section, the employer in whose employment the employee is last exposed to the hazard of the occupational disease shall pay benefits pursuant to section 176.191, subdivision 1. If this last employer had coverage for workers' compensation liability from more than one insurer during the employment the insurer on the risk during the last period during which the employee was last exposed to the hazard of the occupational disease shall pay benefits as provided under section 176.191, subdivision 1, whether or not this insurer was on risk during the last significant exposure. The party making payments under this section shall be reimbursed by the party who is subsequently determined to be liable for the occupational disease, including interest at a rate of 12 percent a year. For purposes of this section, a self-insured employer shall be considered to be an insurer and an employer.
§
Subd. 11.Amount of compensation.
The compensation for an occupational disease is 66-2/3 percent of the employee's weekly wage on the date of injury subject to a maximum compensation equal to the maximum compensation in effect on the date of last exposure.
Notes of Decisions
Guggenberger v. Cold Spring Granite Co., 332 N.W.2d 655 (Minn. 1983).
· cites it 52× “Because the employee's last exposure to silica dust and other irritants occurred in 1965, we reverse on the ground that the claim was barred by the statute of repose provisions of Minn.Stat. § 176.66, subd. 3 (1971). Respondent, Norbert Guggenberger, has worked for relator, Cold…”
Notch v. Victory Granite Co., 238 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 1976).
· cites it 15× “1971, § 176.66, subd. 3, requiring an employee to suffer a “disablement” from silicosis within 3 years of his last on-the-job exposure to silica dust, does “disablement,” in light of Minn.”
Fink v. Cold Spring Granite Co., 115 N.W.2d 22 (Minn. 1962).
· cites it 12× “011, subdivision 15, and was contracted therein within 12 months previous to the date of disablement; except in the case of ■silicosis or asbestosis, in which cases disablement of the employee must occur within three years from the date~of~sucfiemployee’s last exposure with an…”
Moes v. City of St. Paul, 402 N.W.2d 520 (Minn. 1987).
· cites it 8× “Prior to its amendment in 1973, Minn. Stat. § 176.66 , subd. 1, defined “disability” as “the state of being disabled from earning full wages at the work at which the employee was last employed and ‘disablement’ means the act of becoming so disabled.”
Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co., 634 N.W.2d 401 (Minn. 2001).
· cites it 4× “1987) (job transfer); see also Minn. Stat. § 176.66 , subd. 1 (2000) ("The disablement of an employee resulting from an occupational disease shall be regarded as a personal injury within the meaning of the workers' compensation law.”
Silva v. Maplewood Care Ctr., 582 N.W.2d 566 (Minn. 1998).
· cites it 8× “Subdivision 1a applies to all injuries except occupational diseases, in which case Minn. Stat. § 176.66 continues to allocate liability in multiple employer/insurer cases.”
Abram v. Art Goebel Ford, 327 N.W.2d 88 (Minn. 1982).
· cites it 4× “The applicable statute, Minn.Stat. § 176.66, subd. 1 (1980), requires that the employee prove “disablement” from occupational disease: The disablement of an employee resulting from an occupational disease shall be regarded as a personal injury within the meaning of the workers’…”
Stillson v. Peterson & Hede Co., 454 N.W.2d 430 (Minn. 1990).
· cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 176.66, subd. 6 (1967). Here, employee’s cancer was not diagnosed until December 1985.”
Graber v. Peter Lametti Constr. Co., 197 N.W.2d 443 (Minn. 1972).
· cites it 5× “The employee contends principally that the 3-year limitation provided by § 176.66, subd. 3, should be construed so that disability benefits for the disease of silicosis should be permitted when an employee makes his claim within 3 years after the disease manifests itself so as…”
Conwed Corp. v. Employers Reinsurance Corp., 816 F. Supp. 1360 (D. Minnesota 1993).
· cites it 4× “A & A and its predecessor, Charles W. Sexton Company, acted as Conwed’s exclusive insurance broker for its Minnesota operations from at least 1956 until 1985.”
Conwed Corp. v. Employers Reinsurance Corp., 816 F. Supp. 1355 (D. Minnesota 1993).
· cites it 10× “Specifically, Conwed contends that the cancellation provision is in conflict with Section I of the policy because Minn.Stat. § 176.66, subd. 10 compels Employers to indemnify it for the excess liability it incurred in settling the underlying claimants’ claims.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.