Unemployment compensation is primary and, therefore, not technically an “offset” to temporary partial disability benefits.

In this case, the First District Court of Appeal only addressed the effect of the claimant’s receipt of unemployment compensation benefits on the amount of temporary partial disability benefits awarded. After the claimant filed a petition for temporary partial disability benefits, the employer/carrier denied the petition, but also requested that the claimant complete employee earnings reports (DWC-19s) to report any earnings. The claimant reported that he had begun receiving unemployment compensation benefits. The employer/carrier then asserted that the claimant’s unemployment compensation benefits had to be offset and asked the Judge of Compensation Claims to credit same against any temporary partial disability benefits due. The claimant replied that any offset argument would be in an affirmative defense, which was not pled in the pre-trial stipulation, and, therefore, the employer/carrier had waived that defense.

In the final order, the judge awarded temporary partial disability benefits less the amount of unemployment compensation benefits. The claimant moved for rehearing, and the judge found that the effect of the claimant’s receipt of unemployment compensation benefits on temporary partial disability benefits “is not an offset.”

The First District Court of Appeal agreed with the lower court judge and stated that a claimant’s receipt of unemployment compensation benefits does not result in an offset. They defined an offset as a reduction in the amount of worker’s compensation benefits the employer/carrier must pay or a credit against the employer/carrier’s liability for such benefits. They further explained that a claimant’s receipt of unemployment compensation benefits does not reduce the claimant’s entitlement to temporary partial disability benefits. Rather, temporary partial disability benefits are supplemental to any unemployment compensation benefits because unemployment compensation is primary. Therefore, the judge did not err in ruling that unemployment compensation benefits paid to the claimant would not result in an “offset.”

_{What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2021 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.}