office-2

Lois McDowell v. St. Luke’s Hospital of Kansas City

No. 16-051794 (Mo. Lab. & Indust. Rel. Comm’n August 22, 2018)
Full Opinion: [
Lois McDowell v. St. Luke’s Hospital of Kansas City]

Code(s): C030 Compensability;C032 Pre-existing Condition; C031 Idiopathic Event; C035 Past Medical Expense

 

Factual Background:

Claimant is a 65 year old chemist who had 2 prior hip replacement surgeries completed. Claimant had a difficult time carrying all of her materials from the parking garage to the lab which she worked. The parking garage is attached to the hospital by a shared doorway. Claimant’s supervisor recommended and supplied her with a 2-wheeled cart to pack her purse, lunch, and work materials to and from the parking garage. On the date of accident Claimant was walking from the parking garage to the hospital rolling behind her the cart containing her personal items and work materials. She approached the shared doorway and encountered two co-workers each attempted to hold the door for her but in so doing obstructed her path. As Claimant passed through the doorway the wheel on her cart got caught on the trim of the doorway causing her to fall and injure her wrist. Claimant filled out an injury report that day and an x-ray revealed a fractured distal radius. Claimant was referred to an orthopedic surgeon. The orthopedic surgeon opted to perform an open reduction with internal fixation surgery which caused Claimant to be off work from July 13, 2016 until August 29, 2016. The employer asserted she was at no greater risk of falling while rolling a cart than she would be in her normal everyday life. 

ALJ &LIRC Analysis/Holding:

The ALJ found the accident and injury satisfied the 2-part test set out in Gleason v. Turner, 455 S. W. 3d 494 (Mo. App. W.D. 2015) which  required (1) the Court to identify the risk source of a claimant’s injury and (2) then compare that risk source to normal, non-employment activity. Here facts indicated the risk source was pulling the 2-wheeled cart through the congested doorway and there was substantial evidence which created a nexus between work and the 2-wheeled cart. The most persuasive facts included: Claimant’s supervisor recommended and supplied the cart, the care was only used for coming and going to work, the cart was necessary for her to carry her work materials. The LIRC affirmed the ALJ decision. 

The Takeaway:

An Employer who supplies an employee with a 2-wheeled cart to carry her work materials to and from work can be liable for injuries sustained when the cart is identified as the risk source. 

 

Having a Seminar?
Join our E-Mail List
to stay up to date with Evans & Dixon