*
* * NOT FOR PUBLICATION * * *
NO. 23966
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I
SHOYEI AJIFU, Claimant-Appellant,
vs.
STATE
OF HAWAI`I, DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING AND
GENERAL SERVICES, Employer-Appellee, Self-Insured.
APPEAL
FROM THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
(CASE NO. AB 96-440)
(2-97-41422)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Ramil, (*)
and Acoba, JJ.)
Upon
reviewing the record and the briefs submitted, giving due consideration
to the issues raised and the arguments
presented, and having heard oral argument, (2)
we resolve Ajifu's contentions as follows: (1) LIRAB was authorized to
review the period of Ajifu's TTD benefits, see HRS § 386-87
(1993), (3) see also Tamashiro v. Control Specialist,
Inc., 97
Hawai`i 86, 34 P.3d 16 (2001); (2) based on the evidence presented,
LIRAB did not err in determining that Ajifu was not
entitled to TTD benefits after November 26, 1998, see HRS § 386-1
(1993); (4) (3) even assuming, arguendo, that HRS
§ 386-31(b)(1) is applicable to an appeal from the director's
decision, in the instant case, Ajifu was afforded adequate
notice through the appeals process before the LIRAB; and (4) based on
the record, LIRAB's decision is not inconsistent
with the remedial nature of our worker's compensation statutes.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that LIRAB's November 20, 2000 decision and order is affirmed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai`i, May 19, 2004.
Danny
J. Vasconcellos (Herbert
R. Takahashi, Stanford H.
Masui, and Rebecca L. Covert,
of Takahashi, Masui &
Vasconcellos, with him on
the briefs), for claimant-
appellant
* Associate Justice Ramil, who heard oral argument in this case, retired from the bench on December 30, 2002. See Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 602-10.
1. HRS § 386-31 (b) provides in pertinent part:
. . . .
(1) In any case where the director determines based upon a review of medical records and reports and other relevant documentary evidence that an injured employee's medical condition may be stabilized and the employee is unable to return to the employee's regular job, the director shall issue a preliminary decision regarding the claimant's entitlement and limitation to benefits and rights under Hawaii's workers' compensation laws. The preliminary decision shall be sent to the affected employee and the employee's designated representative and the employer and the employer's designated representative and shall state that any party disagreeing with the director's preliminary findings of medical stabilization and work limitations may request a hearing within twenty days of the date of the decision. The director shall be available to answer any questions during the twenty-day period from the injured employee and affected employer. If neither party requests a hearing challenging the Director's finding the determination shall be deemed accepted and binding upon the parties. In any case where a hearing is held on the preliminary findings, any person aggrieved by the director's decision and order may appeal under section 386-87.
2. Oral argument was heard on December 4, 2002.
3. HRS § 386-87(a) provides,
4. HRS § 386-1 provides in pertinent part,
that "'[t]otal disability' means disability of such an extent that the
disabled
employee has no reasonable prospect of finding regular employment of
any kind in the normal labor market."