Comp judge can determine worker’s competence to settle
- October 2, 2025
- Posted by: Web workers
- Category: Workers Comp
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a compensation judge has jurisdiction to determine whether a worker with a traumatic brain injury required the assistance of a conservator to settle his claims and whether his agreements with his employer should be set aside.
Bobby Lykins was working for Anderson Contracting Inc. when he suffered a traumatic brain injury and other physical injuries from an explosion at his workplace in September 2015, according to the latest decision in Lykins v. Anderson Contracting Inc., issued May 21.
Through mediation, Anderson and Mr. Lykins reached a tentative settlement of $630,000 of his claim in April 2017. The parties then agreed to settle the case for $192,000 less than the tentative amount. A compensation judge approved the settlement in May 2017.
A court-appointed conservator filed a petition in 2022 to set aside the 2017 settlement and a 2018 addendum for a hearing and $1,000 in attorneys fees, asserting that both agreements were invalid because Mr. Lykins had been incapacitated when he agreed to them. The conservator also alleged that Anderson’s failure to file relevant medical reports with the proposed settlement amounted to fraud by omission, and that had those reports been filed, the compensation judge would have referred the matter to the district court for consideration of appointment of a conservator much sooner.
Minnesota law provides that an agreement to settle any claim “is not valid if a guardian or conservator is required … and an employee or dependent has no guardian or conservator.” That law authorizes the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals to set aside a workers compensation award and grant a new hearing “for cause.”
The Minnesota Supreme Court found that the conservator had made a showing that Mr. Lykins was incapacitated when he signed the agreements in 2017 and 2018 and that most of the documents in the record, including those submitted by the employer, consistently reflect that Mr. Lykins’ medical providers were concerned about his cognitive functioning at the time.
WorkCompCentral is a sister publication of Business Insurance. More stories here.


