Worker wedged into lunch booth proves claim

In Indiana, in determining whether an injury is compensable, the issue is not whether the injury resulted from an everyday activity but whether the injury was unexpected.

Case name: Waters v. Indiana State University, No. 93A02-1101-EX-78 (Ind. Ct. App. 08/04/11).

Ruling: The Indiana Court of Appeals held that a worker's injuries sustained while exiting from a booth at an employer-sponsored luncheon arose out of her employment.

Lack of fixed work site makes car crash compensable (02/25/13)
Failure to tell doctor pain was work-related doesn't curb benefits (02/25/13)
Employer liable for medical care related to latent, progressive injury (02/25/13)
Claim timely filed within 2 years of fatal heart attack (11/01/12)
Late payments, denial of treatment entitle worker to attorney's fees (09/30/11)

What it means: In Indiana, in determining whether an injury is compensable, the issue is not whether the injury resulted from an everyday activity (as opposed to an unusual event) but whether the injury was unexpected.

Summary: A worker for a university made custom draperies for residence halls. She was obese, suffered from diabetes, and walked with a cane due to problems with her knees. She attended an employee appreciation luncheon during work hours at a cafeteria on the university campus. At the conclusion of the luncheon, she had difficulty exiting the booth she sat in. She rocked back and forth to gain the momentum to stand and twisted her body to exit the booth. The worker felt a pop and pain in the upper part of her leg. The next day, she sought medical treatment, which revealed a fractured femur. She underwent surgery. The worker sought benefits. The Indiana Court of Appeals held that the worker's injury arose out of her employment.

The parties did not dispute whether the worker's injury occurred in the course of her employment but argued whether her injury arose out of her employment. The court found that even if the worker's preexisting conditions made her more susceptible to being injured, a condition of her work environment, the booth, also contributed to her injuries. The court noted that no evidence showed that her injury was caused by her preexisting conditions. Medical reports attributed her injury to her exit from the booth.

One doctor opined that the injury was not work-related because it occurred during a "routine activity of daily living." The court said the doctor's report was based on a "flawed premise." In determining whether an injury is compensable, it must be considered whether the injury itself was unexpected. The court said that although the worker was performing a personal function when she was injured, it was incidental to her employment.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

September 19, 2011

Newsletter Sign-up