No. 10-108268 (Mo. Lab. & Indust. Rel. Comm’n Feb. 10, 2015)
Code(s): C007 Accident; C030 Compensability
Factual
Background:
Claimant was an iron worker in
charge of a project to build a mezzanine. In order to accomplish the job,
he was required to manually move all construction materials into the
building. On 12/28/10, the alleged date of injury, he was cutting screens
all day, which required lifting and twisting. He completed the task without
feeling anything out of the ordinary in his back or legs. However, he
then went home, went to bed and woke up in the middle of the night with
excruciating pain in his back and left leg. He was seen at St. John’s
Mercy Medical Center on 12/29/10 and it was noted that his “pain was associated
with no known injury (iron worker so, does lots of heavy lifting at work but no
specific event).” In his deposition, Claimant testified that he could
have injured his back by erecting the steel, doing everything by hand,
unloading the truck, or moving the steel into the building by hand.
ALJ Decision:
The ALJ denied compensability
finding that Claimant alleged an accident, and in order for him to have a
compensable accident, he must identify by time and place of occurrence the
event or strain which gave rise to his complaints. In light of Claimant’s
inability to point out when or what activity caused his low back complaints,
the ALJ denied compensability.
Analysis/Holding:
The Commission affirmed
the ALJ’s decision but drafted a supplemental opinion to clarify the reasons
why Claimant failed to prove he sustained an accident. The Commission indicated
it is possible to deem a an act of repetitive lifting throughout a single work
shift as a singular “event” or “strain” for purposes of proving an accident, as
long as an employee can identify the time and place of the occurrence.
Additionally, the Commission denied the ALJ’s viewpoint that “at that time”
under Section 287.020.2 means “immediately.” The legislature intended that
prong of defining accident in terms of causation. If a qualified medical expert
can make a causal connection between the specific event and the employee’s
objective symptoms, the employee can use that determination in establishing
whether an accident occurred.
The Takeaway:
Repetitive actions
throughout a single work shift can be deemed a singular event.