 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Reinholtz2/3/1998
NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE PERMANENT LAW REPORTS. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL.
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS, DIV. III
PROCEEDING TO REVIEW AN ORDER OF THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION COURT
CERTIORARI PREVIOUSLY GRANTED.
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OPINION VACATED.
ORDER OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION COURT SUSTAINED.
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, On the briefs,
This case concerns the workers' compensation claim of Terri Reinholtz for disability based on psychological overlay.
Claimant, a Wal-Mart employee, was forcefully and brutally raped by her supervisor while at work in the early working hours of February 19, 1995. The assailant-supervisor had been in the employ of Wal-Mart for over ten (10) years. Claimant was employed in an assistant customer service position at the automotive department at a Tulsa area store. Her duties included opening and closing the automotive store, securing the register and conducting inventory assessments. The rape occurred in the automotive store at Wal-Mart, on a morning when Claimant was scheduled to open the store and would have been there alone for several hours.
Claimant suffered a back injury during the course of the rape, when she was pinned to the wall and thrown onto the floor. Additional injuries to the head and left arm were reserved for future hearing and are not at issue in the instant cause. Claimant does not now receive treatment for her back injury, but has sought continuous treatment for her psychological overlay and a skin rash for which there is no apparent physical cause.
The trial court found Claimant's back injury compensable and ordered benefits based upon Claimant's psychological overlay claim. Wal-Mart appealed this order to a three Judge panel, where the rate of compensation was modified and certain probative value objections were ruled upon, but the trial court's order remained essentially unchanged. The Court of Civil Appeals vacated the award insofar as it awarded benefits for Claimant's psychological overlay and continuing treatment for the skin rash. This Court granted certiorari to address the issue of compensability of psychological overlay in the context of the forcible rape experienced by Claimant.
Claimant asserts on certiorari that rape is a physical injury, and as such the psychological disability she suffers as a result of that physical work related injury is compensable under the Workers' Compensation Act.
For the reasons herein stated, we find Claimant's rape was an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of her employment and sustain the trial court's award with regard to the psychological overlay benefits and treatment for Claimant's skin rash.
The trial court's award to Claimant with regard to her back claim was sustained by the Court of Civil Appeals and we do not disturb that award.
I. A Willful, Intentional Act as an Accidental Injury.
A compensable work related disability under the Workers' Compensation Act must be the result of an accidental injury which arises out of and in the course of a claimant's employment. 85 O.S. 1991 3(7)(a).
Although the rape committed against Claimant was a willful and intentional criminal act on the part of the assailant, it is considered accidental for the purposes of the Workers' Compensation Act.
"When a willful injury is inflicted by a third party, who is the aggressor, upon a workman discharging the tasks he is engaged to perform, and the assault is not motivated solely by persona
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Oklahoma Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|