 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Smith v. Dept of Labor and Industries9/7/1999
The benefits of Title 51 RCW are available to a worker who receives an injury during her lunch period while on the jobsite. Here, the parties stipulated that during her lunch break Geneva Smith was injured while seated on a curb in the customer parking lot of her employer Northwest Restaurants, Inc., who owns and operates Taco Bell restaurants. The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (Board), the Industrial Appeals Judge (IAJ), and the Snohomish County Superior Court erroneously found that the Department of Labor and Industries (Department) could be relieved of the stipulation it entered into with Smith establishing that she was in the employer's parking lot. The case is remanded to the Board for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
On March 1, 1993, Geneva Smith was working as a food preparer and front line person for a Taco Bell restaurant situated just off Highway 99 in Snohomish County. At some time between 1:05 p.m. and 1:35 p.m. she clocked out for her half-hour lunch break, as directed by company policy. During her lunch period Smith was seated on a curb in the Taco Bell customer parking lot. A truck backed into a designated Taco Bell parking stall and hit her causing injury to both of her legs. Smith filed for workers' compensation benefits.
The Department rejected the claim on the ground that Smith's condition was not the result of an industrial injury and was not an occupational disease. Following various hearings and appeals, the Board vacated the proposed decision and order of the IAJ denying Smith's claim. The Board held that Smith's entitlement to coverage turned on whether she was "on the jobsite" of her employer at the time of the injury. Even though this fact is made quite clear in the stipulation entered between the Department and Smith, the Board remanded the case for further hearing to give the claimant an opportunity to present evidence supporting her claim that she was on the employer's jobsite at the time of the injury.
At the remand hearing, Smith vehemently objected to the necessity of taking additional evidence, arguing that the fact stipulation was clear and sufficient for proper resolution of Smith's claim. Counsel for the Department agreed and also objected to the taking of additional testimony. However, due to the Board's order, the IAJ insisted on taking further testimony from Smith. She testified that she left the restaurant and walked up to the customer parking lot adjacent to the paved portion of the lot. She added that this unpaved portion was also used by, and for the convenience of, Taco Bell and its customers. While seated on a cement block eating her lunch, Smith was injured when a Taco Bell customer backed his truck into one of Taco Bell's designated parking stalls in the paved lot. There was no testimony other than from Smith about the parking lot and whether it was used by Taco Bell for business or work process. But, Smith affirmatively stated that the lot was used by Taco Bell and its customers for business purposes.
Following this, counsel for the Department moved to strike that portion of the stipulation stating that Smith was seated in a customer parking lot when she was injured. The Department argued her testimony was now that she was in an unpaved portion of a lot, and did not know if it was owned or maintained by Taco Bell for its customer's use. Smith's counsel objected to striking any portion of the stipulation because the agreement with the Department was entered into to relieve Smith of the burden of presenting any testimony or proof about the customer parking lot. Counsel claimed that striking the stipulation would work a severe hardship on the claimant and her case.
The IAJ denied the
Page 1 2 3 Washington Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|