Thought this case was from the Sixth Appellate District Court (Ohio and surrounding areas), courts in most jurisdictions are likely to hold the same. The Six Appellate District Court recently reaffirmed this standard when it ruled that an employee is not denied a compensable claim merely because her physical fitness at the time of the work incident rendered her more susceptible to the injury than an otherwise healthy individual.
Facts
In October 2006, Ruth Luettke fractured her left leg in a work-related fall. An MRI of her left knee demonstrated osteoarthritis. After the injury, Luettke complained of occasional pain but continued to work full duty.
In August 2012, Luettke alleged that while holding a pry bar to open a dock plate, she put her weight on her left foot, turned, and felt a snap in her left knee. She sought to have a workers' compensation claim recognized for the conditions of sprain of the left knee and tear of her quad tendon. Both Luettke's physician and the employer's examining physician opined that she suffered from preexisting arthritis and that her injury wouldn't have occurred in an otherwise healthy individual.
Luettke's employer questioned the compensability of the claim, contending that her injuries occurred primarily as a result of the preexisting natural deterioration of the weakened condition of her leg and knee. The Ohio Industrial Commission allowed the claim, finding that despite Luettke's preexisting arthritis, she sustained a new and distinct injury. Luettke's employer appealed to the court of common pleas and filed a motion for summary judgment (a ruling in its favor without a trial). The trial court found no genuine issue of material fact and found that Luettke was entitled to judgment. The employer then appealed to the court of appeals.
Court of Appeals' Decision
Like in most states, in Ohio, a work-related injury must occur in the course of and arising out of the injured worker's employment. There must be a causal connection between the injury and the workplace activities. An employee's personal frailties or preexisting health conditions aren't occupational risks and therefore aren't compensable. The definition of an "injury" does not include an injury caused primarily by the natural deterioration of a part of the body.
However, Ohio like most states courts have consistently held that an injured employee will not be barred from participating in the workers' compensation system just because her impaired physical condition rendered her more susceptible to an injury than a normal healthy individual.
In this case, the employer argued that Luettke's injuries weren't compensable because they occurred primarily as a result of the preexisting natural deterioration of her body. Luettke contended that even though she suffered from arthritis, her injuries arose out of her work duties. The Sixth Appellate District Court rejected the employer's contentions and found the injured worker sustained a compensable injury.
In addition, the employer argued that Luettke failed to eliminate her preexisting left knee weakness as a cause of her alleged left knee injuries. The Ohio Supreme Court has previously held that in cases involving unexplained falls, the injured worker has the burden of proof of eliminating idiopathic causes. Idiopathic injuries are those in which an employee's preexisting physical weakness or disease contributes to the work incident. Although the Ohio Supreme Court's ruling relates specifically to unexplained falls, many appellate courts have expanded this doctrine and applied the burden of eliminating idiopathic causes to claims involving preexisting conditions in injuries other than unexplained falls.
The Sixth Appellate District Court concluded that not every health-impaired injured worker who seeks compensation for a subsequent injury to the same body part must eliminate the preexisting condition as a cause of the injury. In this case, the court held that the fact that the force of twisting would not have resulted in a torn tendon to a healthy individual or to Luettke in the absence of her preexisting arthritis did not make her injury unexplained.
The Sixth Appellate District Court held that workers' compensation law does not require all employees to meet a certain level of physical fitness. Further, the court held that even a health-impaired employee is entitled to compensation for an injury subsequent to a preexisting condition occurring in the course and scope of employment, even if the same action would not have injured an otherwise healthy employee. Overall, the court found that Luettke sustained a compensable injury and that the injury was caused by her specific work-related exertion. Luettke v. Autoneum N. Am., Inc., et al., 2015-Ohio-3210.
Takeaway for Employers
Employers should remember that most states laws continues to require that employers take their employees as they find them, whether healthy or with preexisting conditions. The best way to avoid workers' compensation claims is to provide a safe work environment for all employees.
by Rebecca Kopp Levine