A.G. CARRIERS, INC. AND CLAIMS CENTER, APPELLANTS,
v.
BERNIE R. CARROLL, APPELLEE
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.
A long-distance truck driver suffered a lower back strain when he rolled off a worn foam mattress provided by his employer while sleeping in the truck cab during an overnight work trip. The court affirmed the deputy commissioner's finding that the injury was compensable because it arose out of and was in the scope of employment, as the worn mattress and confined sleeping conditions were risks particularly associated with the employment.
The injury arose out of and was in the scope of employment, making it compensable. The employment necessarily exposed Carroll to conditions that substantially contributed to the risk of injury—specifically, the confined sleeping conditions and worn foam mattress—which he would not normally encounter during non-employment life.
[1] An injury arises out of employment when the employment necessarily exposed the claimant to conditions that substantially contributed to the risk of injury, conditions whi…
[2] A claimant suffering from a pre-existing condition must demonstrate that the employment conditions made the injury more likely than it would have been at home.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A claimant suffering from a pre-existing, or idiopathic, condition must show that his injury 'arose out of' his employment, that is, the employment necessarily exposed him to conditions that substantially contributed to the risk of injury, conditions which he would not normally encounter during non-employment life.”
Establishes the legal standard for compensability of injuries involving pre-existing conditions in workers' compensation cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarroll, a long-distance truck driver for the employer, was required to sleep in a small compartment in the truck equipped with a foam rubber mattress…
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
MILLS, Judge.
A.G. Carriers, Inc. and the Claims Center (E/C) appeal from an order of the deputy commissioner finding that Carroll sustained a compensable injury arising out of and in the scope of his employment. We affirm.
Carroll is a long-distance truck driver for the E/C and, when a trip necessitates an overnight stay, is expected to sleep in the truck in a small compartment which is equipped by the E/C with a foam rubber mattress. In the particular truck which Carroll was driving on the trip during which he was injured, the mattress was well-worn and had developed a depression at hip level. As Carroll rolled off of the mattress one morning, his hips “caught” in the depression and he suffered a lower back strain. It was undisputed that the accident aggravated a pre-existing back condition of unknown origin.
The E/C contested Carroll’s claim for worker’s compensation benefits, arguing that the injury was the result of a normal body movement performed while fortuitously at work which could as easily have occurred at home. The D/C rejected this argument, finding that Carroll had been injured because of a risk particularly associated with his employment, namely, the worn mattress provided by the E/C.
A claimant suffering from a pre-existing, or idiopathic, condition must show that his injury “arose out of” his employment, that is, the employment necessarily exposed him to conditions that substantially contributed to the risk of injury, conditions which he would not normally encounter during non-employment life. Medeiros v. Residential Communities of America, 481 So. 2d 92, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); House v. Preferred Auto Leasing, 476 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Here, we find that the conditions present at Carroll’s workplace, namely, confined sleeping conditions and a foam rather than an innerspring mattress, made his injury “more likely than it would be at home.” See Lovett v. Gore Newspapers Co., 419 So. 2d 306 (Fla.1982); Cheney v. F.E.C. News Distribution Co., 382 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Further, although Carroll slept every day regardless of his presence at work or home, sleeping in these conditions on this particular mattress was “indigenous to his work environment.” House, supra.
Affirmed.
BOOTH, C.J., and WENTWORTH, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orlando Precast Prods. v. Ciofalo, 501 So. 2d 1326 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…an employee has a pre-exist-ing condition, before his injury can be found compensable, the employment conditions must expose him to a greater risk of injury than that to which he is exposed in his nonemployment life. A.G. Carriers, Inc. v. Carroll, 496 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Bison Co. v. Shubert, 494 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). In the instant case, the deputy found that the repeated trauma from the straining while lifting the hose and from sitting and bouncing and getting in and out of the Mack…
-
Grenon v. City OF Palm Harbor Fire Dist., 634 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…iling to make such a determination, Moreover, the record indicates that claimant had completely recovered from the initial injury without need for further treatment. Therefore, no apportionment would be proper. . Cf. A.G. Carriers, Inc. v. Carroll, 496 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (finding long-distance truck driver with preexisting back condition expected to sleep in truck on foam rubber mattress who aggravated back by rolling off well-worn mattress entitled to coverage because injury more likely to occur…
-
Acker v. Charles R. Burklew Constr. & Executive Risk Consultants, 654 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…these facts, we held in Cheney that claimant suffered an accident and injury arising out of and in the scope of his employment. 382 So. 2d at 1293; See also Lovett v. Gore Newspapers Co., 419 So. 2d 306 (Fla.1982) and AG. Carriers, Inc. v. Carroll, 496 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Claimant Acker had never before experienced injurious results from looking up in his nonwork-related activities. In his employment as lead carpenter with Burklew Construction he was responsible not only for his own carpentry as…
Authorities Cited
- Medeiros v. Residential Cmtys. OF Am., 481 So. 2d 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Lilla Lovett v. Gore Newspapers Co. & Zurich Ins. Co., 419 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 1982)
- House v. Preferred Auto Leasing & Lynn Underwriting Co. & Gen. Rent-A-Car & Am. Mut. Ins. Co., 476 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- 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)