 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Endicott v. Display Technologies6/25/2002
Opinion Vote: REVERSED AND REMANDED.
All concur.
Opinion:
The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission awarded workers' compensation benefits against two employers, based on the dates of diagnosis of Norman Endicott's diseases. One employer -- Display Technologies, Inc. -- argues it is not liable because it was not the last employer to expose Endicott to the hazard of his occupational diseases. The other employer -- Graphic Technologies, Inc. -- claims that it is not liable for two of Endicott's diseases based on the dates of diagnosis, nor for his third disease (diagnosed during employment with GTI) because Endicott did not give sufficient notice. After opinion by the Court of Appeals, this Court granted transfer. Mo. Const. art. V, section 10. Reversed and remanded.
I.
Endicott seeks benefits from four employers for three occupational diseases: bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, right elbow bursitis, and bilateral thoracic outlet syndrome. Endicott worked for Display Tech from 1981 to January 1998, for ASAP Services, Inc. from February to March 1998, for ADECCO Employment Services, Inc. from April to July 1998, and for GTI from July 1998 to March 2000.
At Display Tech, Endicott built and tested computer monitors, requiring constant repetitive use of his upper extremities. This work caused pain in his hands, wrists, forearms, right elbow, shoulders, and neck. In July 1993, he was diagnosed with mild-to-moderate right carpal tunnel syndrome, and mild left carpal tunnel syndrome. On June 1994, Endicott and Display Tech settled a claim based on an approximate disability of ten percent of the wrist.
For the following three years, Endicott was a supervisor, which did not require repetitive handwork. While Display Tech was going out of business, he helped disassemble the plant, working 72-hour weeks from October 1997 to January 1998. The problems with his upper extremities reappeared.
In February and March, Endicott worked for ASAP on a job similar to that at Display Tech. His problems continued. On March 2, he was diagnosed with right elbow bursitis.
On April 22, Endicott began employment with ADECCO, which assigned him to GTI for duties including repetitive action. He became a permanent employee of GTI on July 17.
On November 2, 1998, Endicott filed for compensation. He alleged an onset date of December 1997, the time of the disassembly work when his symptoms were most painful. On January 25, 1999, he was diagnosed with bilateral thoracic outlet syndrome, and later amended his claim.
At the hearing on Endicott's claim, his doctor opined that his conditions were caused by repeated minor trauma to the upper extremities during employment. His doctor testified that Endicott's employment with Display Tech, ASAP and GTI "were each capable of causing the problems that he exhibited, but it was [Endicott's] allegation that most of them occurred while he worked for Display Tech and that some worsening occurred while working for ASAP and that he seemed to reach a steady state and did not have additional worsening when he worked for GTI." Notably, the Commission adopted the finding that Endicott's employment with each employer was a substantial contributing factor to his injuries. Yet, by history, his doctor concluded that Endicott's work at Display Tech was the most substantial contributing factor, and in effect the cause of his injuries.
The Administrative Law Judge held GTI solely liable under the last exposure rule in section 287.063. Partly reversing, the Commission used the dates of diagnosis -- not the date of the claim -- as the assessment date.
Page 1 2 3 Missouri Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|