Worker’s Compensation to pay deceased teacher

The NMI Retirement Fund’s Workers’ Compensation Commission has agreed to pay $40,000 to the Public School System teacher who died while on duty in 1992, following a court ruling and as recommended by the Attorney General’s Office.

Fund administrator Karl T. Reyes said the commission, which operates under the Fund, initially wanted the AGO to appeal the decision, but the latter reportedly recommended that the matter be immediately settled.

“The AGO recommended that we go ahead and pay, and close it. But we can’t pay more than $40,000,” said Reyes.

In a Sept. 23, 2004 decision, associate judge David A. Wiseman reversed WCC’s denial of the claim filed by Antonio A. Santos on behalf of his deceased wife, PSS teacher Susana A. Santos, who died in February 1992 while on assignment on Tinian.

Wiseman ordered the payment of $40,000 without any amount withheld plus interests. The judge also ruled that Santos is entitled to attorney’s fee for all proceedings since 1993 when former WCC hearing officer Edward H. Manglona reversed himself.

Manglona, in an August 1993 hearing, had recommended the awarding of compensation to Santos, but he later reversed it in a “formal hearing” after then-WCC administrator Tomas Aldan appealed the first hearing.

The case was brought to court, resulting in the Superior Court affirming the WCC decision.

The Supreme Court, however, later reversed the WCC’s and the Superior Court’s decisions, finding that compensation was due. The High Court then remanded the case to WCC for payment.

During discussions on how much to give the claimant, the administrator said that payments were only obligatory from the date of the Supreme Court’s remand, and offered to pay the amount, minus 4 percent deduction.

The administrator also said that Santos was not entitled to pre- or post-judgment interest on the total amount, nor attorney’s fees.

Santos appealed Aldan’s decision in court. In response, WCC filed a counter-claim, accusing Santos of improperly raising new issues on appeal.

Wiseman, in his ruling, dismissed WCC’s contention that Santos is not allowed to cite statutes and case law not previously used to support arguments made at the administrative level.

On the 4-percent deduction, Wiseman said that WCC ignored the fact that 4 CMC 9323, which provides for a 4-percent discount, applies to future payments that a claimant may wish to take early.

In Santos’s case, he said the $40,000 payment should have started being paid on a weekly basis beginning Feb. 19, 1992. Paying on a weekly basis, the entire amount would have been paid out by Aug. 16, 1997, or more than five years ago.

Further, the judge said that Santos, who is still attempting to collect money due after more than 10 years, is entitled to attorney’s fees.

As of April 2004, Wiseman said that Santos has spent nearly $24,000 in legal fees to exhaust administrative remedies, despite the appeals continually returning to the same decision maker.

Meantime, Reyes said that Santos would have received the same amount over a decade ago.