Wright v. Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund

484 S.W.3d 56 (Mo. E.D. 2015)

Factual Background:

Claimant was an employee of Roto-Rooter Services Company.  On 7/21/11, he was sitting on a chair in Employer’s lunchroom eating his lunch when the chair collapsed from underneath him.  He fell to the floor and injured his low back.  He later developed intense pain in his low back and down his right leg.  He filed a Claim for Compensation against his employer and the SIF.  He reached a settlement with Employer and the remaining claim against the SIF proceeded to trial.  

Commission Decision:

The Commission affirmed the ALJ’s decision to award benefits stating that Claimant’s injury arose out of and in the course of employment because the source of risk that caused the injury was the collapse of that particular chair, which belonged to Employer. The Commission found the injury was causally connected to the work activity under the limited extension of the premises doctrine. The SIF appealed, arguing that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment.

Analysis/Holding:

The Court of Appeals disagreed with the Commission, noting that although Claimant was eating lunch at the time instead of performing his job duties, the personal comfort doctrine provides compensation when an employee sustains an injury on the employer’s premises while attending to personal comfort (eating lunch).  The Court also agreed with the Commission that it made no sense to protect employees going to and from lunch under extended premises liability while not protecting employees on the employer’s premises during lunch. 

Second, the Court focused on the source of the risk of injury, the particular chair, to find that Claimant was not equally exposed to the risk of injury outside of his employment.  Since Claimant only sat in that chair while at work, he was injured because he was at work, not simply while he was at work.  Therefore, the injury arose out of and in the course of employment, and the Court affirmed the Commission’s decision.

The Takeaway:

The personal comfort doctrine extends not only to going to and from lunch but protects employees during lunch as well.