Should worker collect comp for this injury?
January 4, 2010 by Christian SchappelPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter - benefits, Latest News & Views, Money, Pay and benefits, Who won?
Read what happened to this worker and see if you can guess whether or not she was awarded workers’ comp benefits.
What happened
A female worker was injured while traveling to a shopping center to buy food and gifts for a holiday party at her employer’s office.
Her husband was driving her to the shopping center when he lost control of his truck. It struck a median and rolled over several times.
The worker then applied for workers’ comp. Did she get it?
The decision
Yes. A workers’ comp judge concluded she should collect comp benefits because she was injured while performing a work-related duty that benefited her employer.
The judge’s reasoning: Her employer supported holiday parties as a way to build teamwork. Plus, the worker was on call at the time of the crash.
Her employer appealed the comp award to a workers’ comp board, a state appeals court and finally the state supreme court. At every step, the decision was upheld.
Cite: Casarez v. Davita, Inc.
Tags: Casarez, Davita, Supreme Court, workers comp
January 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
It’s a good decision. Of course subrogation needs to be filed against the Husband who negligently caused the wreck.
January 7th, 2010 at 11:20 am
Observations:
1. Correct decisions with the limited info relayed.
2. Very Poor legal advice from the defense attorney/examiner and/or whomever wanted to “fight” the decision.
3. The first commenters idea of recovery against the claimant’s husband is on the right track, but a bit misguided. Recovery should be directed towards the husband/claimant’s auto liability policy (how can you sue the husband if the damage ultimately harms the injured worker??)
January 7th, 2010 at 11:57 am
Not sure why the husband was involved in driving her to the store, was it after hours? No matter, she should be compensated for it was a work related duty. The company should look into recovery from the spouses insurance since it was his neglect.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
From one who has to run errands all of the time; I agree with the decision. I was hit in the post office parking lot while going for the business. I never received compensation from the lady that hit me. I was also pregnant at the time & my employer never even offered assistance.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Yes, it was a correct decision on the part of the courts and on the part of the claimant.
On the other hand, the employer should fire their attorneys for giving bad advice and for wasting a huge amount of money to appeal a losing case over and over.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Appropriate decision and bad advice from attorney who wanted to “fight.” Clearly it was aoe/coe. Of course, there is always the potential to subrogate against the husband.
January 12th, 2010 at 10:07 am
The company should feel very fourtunate that the husband did not bring a liability suit against them. He was obviously taking his wife to store for the sole purpose of the company’s party. His services were required to assist her to complete her duties.
January 14th, 2010 at 12:20 pm
I have to agree with everyone — and suggest that the company fire their legal counsel for a colossal waste of money fighting this issue.
January 18th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Been there: Why do you say “it was his neglect”? With only the information provided, one can only gain the understanding that he lost control and negligence is not mentioned either way. It could have been an animal ran out in front of him or that he hit a slick spot in the road. Many things can make one lose control of the vehicle that one is driving at anytime but that does not show negligence. Accidents can be just that, accidents!