STRATEGIC MARKETING SYSTEMS AND CIGNA INSURANCE COMPANIES, APPELLANTS,
v.
PAUL J. SORANNO, 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.
Strategic Marketing Systems and its workers' compensation carrier appealed a decision awarding benefits to a telemarketing employee who injured his knee while simply changing positions in his chair at work. The court reversed, holding that the injury did not arise out of or in the course of employment because it resulted from ordinary personal movement unrelated to job duties.
The injury was not compensable because it did not arise out of or in the course of employment. The movement causing the injury was merely changing positions while seated, not engaging in any work-related activity or motion, and employment conditions did not contribute to or aggravate the injury.
[1] An injury sustained while merely changing position while seated at a desk is not an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.
[2] The mere occurrence of an injury at the workplace is insufficient to establish workers' compensation compensability.
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“Under these circumstances it cannot be said that claimant's injury was caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.”
Establishes the holding that the employee's simple movement of changing position does not constitute a work-related accident.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePaul Soranno worked as a telemarketing representative seated at an armless swivel chair before a computer terminal. On May 6, 1988, after sitting for …
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 Compensable Accident cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
The employer, Strategic Marketing Systems, and its workers’ compensation carrier, Cigna Insurance Companies, Inc., appeal an order finding that claimant was injured in a compensable accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. We reverse.
Claimant was employed as a telemarketing representative by the employer. His job duties required him to be seated at an armless swivel chair before a computer terminal, but he was not precluded from moving about at will. On May 6, 1988, claimant arrived at work and sat down in his chair, crossing his left leg underneath him. After approximately five minutes he decided to change position and when he started to get up his left knee popped and locked. Claimant did not fall or strike his knee in any way, and he denied any previous history of knee problems. He was diagnosed as having suffered a torn meniscus of the left knee. Claimant sustained a temporary re-injury of the same knee September 6, 1988, when he fell off a platform at work.
The judge of compensation claims (JCC), notwithstanding obvious reservations, found both accidents compensable in reliance upon Distinctive Builders of Panama City, Inc. v. Walker, 518 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
We believe the instant case is distinguishable. In Walker the claimant sustained a disabling injury as the result of an internal traumatic event which occurred when the claimant, while seated at his office desk, turned to reach for a set of blueprints pigeonholed nearby, twisting his upper body while reaching simultaneously. In the case sub judice the claimant’s movement causing the injury was merely to change positions while seated. He did not twist or lean or engage in any other type of motion other than to simply start to get up from his chair. Under these circumstances it cannot be said that claimant’s injury was caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The Florida Supreme Court has expressly declined to broaden the purpose of workers’ compensation legislation to allow recovery for any injury occurring in the work place, including injuries arising out of conditions personal to the claimant which are not caused or aggravated by industry. Leon County School Board v. Grimes, 548 So. 2d 205, 206 (Fla.1989).
The mere occurrence of an injury at work, without more, is not enough to establish compensability. See Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. McCook, 355 So. 2d 1166 (Fla.1977).
Claimant’s injuries were not the result of an accident arising out of his employment, and his employment conditions in no way contributed to his injury. Accordingly, the JCC’s order finding claimant’s May 6, 1988, accident compensable is reversed.
BOOTH and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grenon v. City OF Palm Harbor Fire Dist., 634 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…rkers’ compensation legislation to allow recovery for all injuries occurring in the workplace, including those arising out of conditions personal to the claimant which are not caused or aggravated by industry. Strategic Marketing Systems v. Soranno, 559 So. 2d 353, 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (citing Leon County School Board v. Grimes, 548 So. 2d 205, 206 (Fla.1989)). An idiopathic condition which results in injury to the worker does not “arise out of’ employment unless the employment in some way contributes to t…
Authorities Cited
- S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. McCOOK, 355 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1977)
- Leon Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Grimes, 548 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1989)
- Distinctive Builders OF Panama City, Inc. v. Walker, 518 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)