BAKER MOBILES OF FLORIDA AND UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
EUGENE O'NEIL AND THE DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Baker Mobiles appealed a workers' compensation award to Eugene O'Neil for a spinal compression fracture sustained while lifting a cinder block. The court reversed, holding that because the claimant's pre-existing osteoporosis from steroid therapy did not require exertion beyond what he normally encountered in his non-working life, the injury did not arise out of his employment.
An employee with a pre-existing idiopathic condition may only recover workers' compensation benefits if the injury resulted from exertion or strain beyond that which the employee normally encounters in his non-working life. Since O'Neil's injury occurred during ordinary lifting activity no different from what he would encounter outside work, the injury did not arise out of his employment and is not compensable.
[1] An employee's idiopathic condition is not compensable unless the injury resulted from an exertion or strain beyond that normally encountered in the employee's non-working…
[2] An injury is not compensable if the conditions of employment were not such as the employee would normally encounter in his non-working life.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“when an employee brings to his job some idiopathic condition, before the injury may be found compensable, the employee must demonstrate that it resulted from an exertion or strain beyond that which he normally encountered, in his non-working life”
Establishes the controlling legal standard for compensability of injuries involving pre-existing conditions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceO'Neil sustained compression fractures of the L-1 and L-3 vertebrae while lifting or attempting to lift a cinder block at work. The deputy commissione…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Idiopathic Condition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order of the deputy commissioner awarding temporary total disability benefits, payment of medical bills, penalties, and future medical care. We reverse.
While lifting or attempting to lift a cinder block, the claimant sustained a compression fracture of the L-l and L-3 vertebrae. The deputy commissioner found that at the time of the accident the claimant was suffering from severe osteoporosis, which had slowly developed as a result of steroid therapy administered to control his bronchial asthma. He found that the steroid therapy led to a progressive weakening of the bones in the claimant’s back to the point that he sustained compression fractures as a result of lifting the cinder block.
It is settled that when an employee brings to his job some idiopathic condition, before the injury may be found compensable, the employee must demonstrate that it resulted from an exertion or strain beyond that which he normally encountered, in his non-working life. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company v. McCook, 355 So. 2d 1166 (Fla.1977); Gore Newspapers v. Lovett, 393 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Market Food Distributors, Inc. v. Levenson, 383 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); 1 Larson Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 12.10, 3252 (1978). Compare, Croft v. Pinkerton-Hayes Lumber Company, 386 So. 2d 535 (Fla.1980) (claimant working under unusual strain); Ivy H. Smith Company v. Kates, 395 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (claimant subjected to unusual stress and exertion); Legakis v. Sultan & Sons, 383 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (working conditions such as would not normally be encountered); Cheney v. F. E. C. News Distribution Company, 382 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (working conditions such as would not normally be encountered).
In the instant case, there is no evidence that the claimant’s injury occurred as a result of an effort greater than that which he would normally encounter in his non-working life, nor is there any evidence that the conditions of his employment were such as he would not normally encounter in his non-working life. Accordingly, the injury may not be said to be one which “arose out of” his employment. Market Food Distributors v. Levenson. The order of the deputy commissioner is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the claim.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hernando Cnty. Sch. Bd. & Gallagher Bassett Servs. v. Dokoupil, 667 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…ding compensable the injuries which were not caused by an increased hazard in the workplace and as such did not arise out of the claimant’s employment. Osteoporosis is such a preexisting idiopathic condition. See Baker Mobiles of Florida v. O’Neil, 412 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). When there is a preexisting idiopathic condition like the claimant’s osteoporosis, the work performed must create an increased hazard of injury to the claimant. See Metropolitan Dade County v. Russell, 637 So. 2d 69, 70 (Fla. 1s…
-
Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd. & Poe Risk Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Williams, 565 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…some idiopathic condition, before the injury may be found compensable, the employee must demonstrate that it resulted from an exertion or strain beyond that which he normally encountered, in his non-working life.” Baker Mobiles of Florida v. O’Neil, 412 So. 2d 34, 34-35 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The general rule regarding compensability, set out above, is not nearly so confining. And since the JCC left claimant’s conflicting renditions of the bus cleaning incident unresolved by finding claimant “may or may not” h…
-
Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Williams, 601 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…jury solely as a result of a normal movement, his further finding that there was an aggravation of a preexisting condition causally connected to her employment is inconsistent and constitutes reversible error. See Baker Mobiles of Florida v. O’Neil, 412 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Consequently, the order finding compensability and awarding benefits is hereby REVERSED. ERVIN and KAHN, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. McCOOK, 355 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1977)
- Mkt. Food Distribs., Inc. v. Levenson, 383 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Croft v. Pinkerton-Hayes Lumber Co., 386 So. 2d 535 (Fla. 1980)
- First S. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Mobile v. Dep't OF Revenue of the State of Fla., 382 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Cheney v. F. E. C. News Distrib. Co. & Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 382 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Legakis v. Sultan & Sons & Cosmopolitan Mut. Ins. Co., 383 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Gore Newspapers Co. & Zurich Ins. Co. v. Lilia Lovett, 393 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- IVY H. Smith Co. & United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Kates, 395 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)