Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Steven Simmons v. B.T. Office Products, Inc.

Decision date: October 10, 200629 pages

Summary

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's award denying workers' compensation benefits to Steven Simmons, finding that his alleged July 9, 1998 injury did not arise out of and in the course of his employment as a warehouse associate. No benefits were awarded and the claim was dismissed.

Archive Notice

This archive contains published Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission workers' compensation decisions reproduced for research convenience. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Legal Help

Practical guidance for this decision

Third-Party Injury Check

This workers' comp decision may point to a separate injury claim.

  • A driver, contractor, property owner, or equipment company may share fault.
  • The injury involved a vehicle, unsafe premises, defective equipment, or a non-employer vendor.
  • A serious injury or death may need both benefits review and civil-claim analysis.

Caption

FINAL AWARD DENYING COMPENSATION

(Affirming Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge)

Injury No.: 98-177473

Employee: Steven Simmons

Employer: B. T. Office Products

Insurer: Travelers Indemnity Company of America

Additional Party: Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund

Date of Accident: Alleged July 9, 1998

Place and County of Accident: Alleged St. Louis County, Missouri

The above-entitled workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by section 287.480 RSMo. Having reviewed the evidence and considered the whole record, the Commission finds that the award of the administrative law judge is supported by competent and substantial evidence and was made in accordance with the Missouri Workers' Compensation Act. Pursuant to section 286.090 RSMo, the Commission affirms the award and decision of the administrative law judge dated January 25, 2006, and awards no compensation in the above-captioned case.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Edwin J. Kohner, issued January 25, 2006, is attached and incorporated by this reference.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this $\qquad 10th \qquad$ day of October 2006.

LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

William F. Ringer, Chairman

Alice A. Bartlett, Member

John J. Hickey, Member

Attest:

Secretary

AWARD

Employee: Steven Simmons

De pendents: $\quad \mathrm{N} / \mathrm{A}$

Injury No.: 98-177473

Before the

Division of Workers'

Employer:B.T. Office Products, Inc.Compensation
Additional Party:Second Injury FundDepartment of Labor and Industrial
Relations of Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri
Insurer:Travelers Indemnity Company of America
Hearing Date:November 22-23, 2005Checked by: EJK

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW

  1. Are any benefits awarded herein? No
  2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? No
  3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? No
  4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: July 9, 1998 (alleged)
  5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: St. Louis County, Missouri
  6. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes
  7. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes
  8. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? No
  9. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes
  10. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes
  11. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: The employee, a warehouse associate, 7 worked long hours in a hot warehouse.
  12. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No Date of death? N/A
  13. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Body as a whole
  14. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: None
  15. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: None
  16. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? None

Employee: Steven Simmons Injury No.: 98-177473 17. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? None 18. Employee's average weekly wages: $\ 597.20 19. Weekly compensation rate: $\$ 398.13 / \ 294.73 20. Method wages computation: By agreement

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

  1. Amount of compensation payable:

None 22. Second Injury Fund liability: No

  1. Future requirements awarded: None

Said payments to begin immediately and to be payable and be subject to modification and review as provided by law.

The compensation awarded to the claimant shall be subject to a lien in the amount of 25 % of all payments hereunder in favor of the following attorney for necessary legal services rendered to the claimant: David J. Rauscher, Esq.

FINDINGS OF FACT and RULINGS OF LAW:

Employee:Steven SimmonsInjury No.: 98-177473
Dependents:N/ABefore the <br> Division of Workers' <br> Compensation
Employer:B.T. Office Products, Inc.Department of Labor and Industrial
Additional Party:Second Injury FundRelations of Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri
Insurer:Travelers Indemnity Company of AmericaChecked by: EJK

This workers' compensation case raises several issues arising out of a work related injury in which the claimant, a warehouse associate, suffered heat exhaustion while working long hours in a hot warehouse. The issues for determination are (1) Accident or occupational disease arising out of and in the course of employment, (2) Medical causation, (3) Past medical benefits, (4) Future medical benefits, (5) Temporary disability benefits, (6) Permanent disability benefits, and (7) Liability of the Second Injury Fund. The evidence compels an award for the defense, because the claimant was compensated for his work related injury in case bearing Injury Number 98-177475.

At the hearing, the claimant and Nancy Puzniak, Director of Human Resources for the Employer, testified in person. The claimant also offered depositions of Fred Hicks, M.D., Joseph Hanaway, M.D., and James M. England, a vocational rehabilitation counselor, voluminous medical records, weather records, a job description, pay check stubs, selected portions of the DSM-IV, letters from the employer to the claimant and selected letters from Hartford Insurance. The defense offered the depositions of Stacey Smith, M.D., and Patrick Hogan, M.D., records from Hartford Insurance, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, the Division of Workers Compensation, and Dr. Edward Kweskin, Ph.D., a medical report from David Volarich, D.O., and the employer's personnel file.

All objections not previously sustained are overruled as waived. Jurisdiction in the forum is authorized under Sections 287.110, 287.450, and 287.460, RSMo 2000, because the accident occurred in Missouri.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

This forty-eight year old claimant worked as a warehouse worker for twenty years. He previously worked for National Foods for fifteen years before his employer laid him off in 1995. In November 1995, this employer hired him as a warehouse worker where he worked until July 1998. He stopped working in July 1998 allegedly due to the effects of heat exhaustion. His warehouse duties with the employer primarily involved shipping and

receiving, wherein he would operate an "order picker" in the warehouse to retrieve merchandise. This employer hired him as a "warehouseman" and promoted him to "lead associate" in December 1997, which involved the same job duties in addition to supervision of several employees. The claimant testified that his job duties involved a lot of walking and standing, along with lifting, stooping, reaching and crouching. He described the warehouse as "hot", though the temperature would vary. He described his general work atmosphere as stressful with lots of daily pressure and deadlines.

More specifically, the claimant described his job duties of "filling orders" and "replenishment". When filling orders, he would review a purchase order/invoice. He would then determine the quantity and location of the item so it could be retrieved in the warehouse and prepared for shipment. When handling replenishment, he would restock items in the warehouse so that the "pickers" could continue to fill orders. He testified that replenishment was heavier work and that he would often work up high on his "order picker" near the ceiling, where it was hotter. He testified that he performed replenishment activities over the last few weeks of his employment in July 1998. He testified that he worked longer hours during his last weeks of employment due to a shortage of workers.

The physical demands for the claimant's position required that in an eight hour day, an employee stands for eight hours, walks for five hours, lifts 51 to 100 pounds frequently ( 34-66 % of the time), lifts over 100 pounds occasionally ( 0 33 % of the time), climbs occasionally ( 0-33 % of the time) and stoops and crouches frequently ( 34-66 % of the time). See Exhibit S. An employee also frequently reaches above shoulder height. See Exhibit S. The position description involves "Heavy work: Lifting 100 lbs. maximum with frequent lifting and/or carrying of objects weighing up to 50 lbs." See Exhibit S. The position also requires: "Verying (sic) temperature in workplace" and "Continuous activity - cannot leave work area during working hours, except assigned breaks." See Exhibit S. The specific duties require that an employee "must routinely be able to lift, pull, press, bend, twist and carry up to 60 lbs." In addition, he "must be able to perform strenuous work in varying temperature conditions." See Exhibit S.

The claimant received two fifteen minute breaks and a forty-five minute lunch with no further breaks during overtime. There were no work/rest cycles and no instructions on how to work in hot conditions, but the claimant knew that he had to keep hydrated.

The warehouse is a large cinder block building with an aluminum roof and two small exhaust fans in the 30 feet high ceiling. The warehouse was not air-conditioned. There were both a receiving and a separate shipping dock. The claimant testified that conditions on the dates of his injury were like an oven and that it was hotter inside the building than outside. He testified that another employee brought a thermometer to work the previous year but was told to remove it or he would be fired. On that date, the temperature in the building was eight degrees hotter than the outside temperature.

The maximum temperatures during the period July 6 through July 9, 1998 were in excess of 90 degrees. On July 9, 1998 the temperature at 3:00 p.m. was 90 degrees and at midnight the outside temperature was still 81 degrees and the humidity had risen significantly over the claimant's shift. See Exhibit Q.

On the last date he was able to work, claimant was working on replenishment, which is heavier labor than order picking. He used an order picker, which is a large machine with forks to hold wooden pallets. He would stand on a platform, which would go up 25 feet. He spent 70-75 % of the time on the order picker. It was hotter closer to the roof. The outside temperature had been ninety degrees or above every day on the week of July 6, 1998.

In the four days during the week of his injury, the claimant worked 50 to 55 hours. He worked from 3:00 p.m. until the work was complete for the day. The employer was short workers, and the claimant worked overtime most of the time. One day during the week of the injury, he was still at work when the sun came up. For the twoweek period ending on July 10, 1998, he worked 80 regular hours and 9.25 overtime hours. See Exhibit W. He also received 8 hours of paid holiday for July 4 when he did not work. He was not able to work on July 10 at his 3:00 p.m. shift. Therefore, he worked 89.25 hours in eight days. This period of long hours in high heat made this week different than others.

On the date he last worked, the shift supervisor, Mike Pope, was on vacation. The claimant and two other

lead associates ran the shift but were short on crew.

The claimant began feeling ill on the evening of July 9, 1998. He continued working until about 1:00 or 1:30 a.m. on July 10, 1998. At that time, he felt hot, had a headache, stomach pain, blurred vision, lightheadedness, trouble concentrating. He was sweating profusely and threw up in the rest room. He feared he would faint or that something serious was happening to him. He had never felt anything like that before.

There were a couple of hours of work left to do but he paged the other two lead associates and told them that he was overheated and sick and that he had to leave. He sat in his air-conditioned car for about fifteen minutes feeling disoriented and lost. He wondered what was happening and if he could make it the short distance to his home. Eventually, he drove home, took off hi

Full decision text continues in the plain-text archive copy.

Related Decisions

affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's award allowing workers' compensation benefits for Jason L. Collins' occupational disease claim involving cumulative trauma to his back and right lower extremity sustained while employed as a truck driver/laborer. The Commission rejected the employer's argument that an untimely answer resulted in admission of all facts including legal conclusions about whether the injury arose out of employment.

occupational disease9,505 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of death benefits to the widow of Russell Hayes, a volunteer firefighter killed in the line of duty. The majority awarded death benefits at the statutory minimum wage rate of $40.00 per week, though a dissenting opinion argued for a higher wage determination based on the statutory provisions for calculating average weekly earnings.

occupational disease5,849 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation benefits to Elizabeth A. Steele for injuries sustained when a patient slammed his leg down on her head, neck, and shoulders while she was working as a critical care unit nurse. The Commission found the award was supported by competent and substantial evidence and determined the employee is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.

occupational disease10,794 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award denying compensation to Carl Hanes for an alleged occupational disease from radiation exposure at the Department of Corrections. The Commission found the employee failed to provide proper notice and that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment, resulting in no benefits awarded.

occupational disease6,305 words

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's Temporary or Partial Award in a workers' compensation case for employee Cynthia Porter, finding the award supported by competent and substantial evidence. The Commission upheld the ALJ's determination that the claimant's diabetes was well-controlled, rejecting the employer/insurer's challenge to this medical finding.

occupational disease7,008 words