Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Francisco Gomez v. Output Technologies

Decision date: March 15, 2012Injury #98-17640713 pages

Summary

The Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision denying all workers' compensation benefits to Francisco Gomez for an upper back injury sustained on January 1, 1998, while working as a machine operator at Output Technologies. Although the injury was found to be compensable and work-related, no compensation was awarded.

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.: 98-176407

Employee: Francisco Gomez

Employer: Output Technologies

Insurer: Travelers Insurance Company

The above-entitled workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by § 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 Law. Pursuant to § 286.090 RSMo, the Commission affirms the award and decision of the administrative law judge dated September 13, 2011, and awards no compensation in the above-captioned case.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Kenneth J. Cain, issued September 13, 2011, is attached and incorporated by this reference.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this $\qquad 15^{\text {th }} \qquad$ day of March 2012.

LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

William F. Ringer, Chairman

James Avery, Member

Curtis E. Chick, Jr., Member

Attest:

Secretary

AWARD

Employee: Francisco Gomez

Injury No. 98-176407

Employer: Output Technologies

Insurer: Travelers Insurance Company

Additional Party: N/A

Hearing Date: August 1, 2011

Briefs Filed: September 1, 2011

Checked by: KJC/1h

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? Yes.
  3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes.
  4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: January 1, 1998.
  5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: Kansas City, Jackson 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? Yes.
  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: Employee, while in the course and scope of his employment as a machine operator for Output Technologies was installing a roll of floor mats. The roll was in an upright position and beginning to fall as a co-worker walked past it. Employee grabbed the roll of floor mats to keep it from falling on the co-worker and in so doing felt pain in his back between his shoulder blades.
  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: Upper back.
  14. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: -0 -

Issued by DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

Employee: Francisco Gomez

  1. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: None.
  2. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? None.
  3. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? None.
  4. Employee's average weekly wages: $\ 578.40.
  5. Weekly compensation rate: $\$ 385.60 / \ 278.42.
  6. Method wages computation: By agreement.

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

  1. Amount of compensation payable:

Unpaid medical expenses: None.

-0- weeks for permanent partial disability

-0- weeks of temporary total and temporary partial disability benefits

TOTAL: None

  1. Second Injury Fund liability: None.
  2. Future requirements awarded: None.

Said payments to begin as of the date of the award 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 N/A percent of all payments hereunder in favor of the following attorney for necessary legal services rendered to the claimant: N/A

FINDINGS OF FACT and RULINGS OF LAW:

Employee: Francisco Gomez

Injury No. 98-176407

Employer: Output Technologies

Insurer: Travelers Insurance Company

Additional Party: N/A

Hearing Date: August 1, 2011

Briefs Filed: September 1, 2011

Checked by: KJC/1h

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into various admissions and stipulations. The remaining issues were as follows:

  1. Accident;
  2. Notice;
  3. Nature and extent of any disability sustained by the employee; and
  4. Liability of the employer for past and future medical aid.

At the hearing, Mr. Francisco Gomez (hereinafter referred to as Claimant) testified that he was born on June 2, 1957 in Mexico. He stated that he became a United States citizen in 1985.

Claimant testified that he obtained his high school diploma in 1987. He stated that he had also received training in welding and that in 1995 he earned an associate's degree in applied science.

Claimant testified that in 1985 he was hired by Output Technologies as a machine operator. He stated that his job required him to maintain and install machines, do paperwork and to understand warehouse operations. He stated that he sustained two injuries while at work at Output.

Claimant testified that his first injury occurred on January 1, 1998, while he was installing a roll of floor mats. He stated that the roll which was "standing up" began to fall as a co-worker passed in front of it. He stated that he grabbed the roll and that in so doing he felt pain in his back between his shoulder blades. He stated that he could not move his arms.

Claimant testified that he immediately reported the injury to his employer. He stated that although he received some treatment for his injuries; it did not relieve his back pain. He described his alleged back pain as stabbing, and indicated that it radiated down his arms, but not into his neck area. He stated that his arms felt weak and numb and with electric shock type sensations.

Claimant testified that on August 25, 1998, he sustained another injury at work. He stated that the injury occurred as he was removing a 50 to 60 pound motor from a machine. He stated that while holding the motor it "pulled" him and that he felt severe pain in his low back. He indicated that he immediately reported the injury and that his employer referred him for treatment. He stated that while in therapy for his low back pain, he injured his neck. He stated that he last worked in 2000.

Claimant indicated that in 2005 he had a laminectomy and fusion at the L4-L5 disk level. He stated that he had neck surgery in 2002 and that in 2010 another neck surgery to "fix it".

Claimant admitted that in 2000 he was involved in a motor vehicle accident. He stated that the accident occurred when his pick-up truck was rear ended by another truck on the highway. He stated that in the accident his head struck the rear window of his truck and that he did not receive any permanent injuries, although he did get a bump on his head.

Claimant testified that he was later rear ended in another highway motor vehicle accident. He stated that the accident occurred while he was in the turn lane and that he did not sustain any injuries.

Claimant complained that his current problems involved severe neck and back pain, pain from his hip to his toes, difficulty in grabbing and reaching, an inability to walk, leg pain when going up and down stairs and feeling unstable. He stated that he used a cane to walk. He stated that his two neck surgeries did not relieve his neck pain. He stated that he had no problems with his neck or upper back until the 1998 injuries at work.

Finally, Claimant testified that he was getting social security and UNUM disability benefits. He stated that he had not looked for work since he lost his job at Output Technologies.

On cross-examination by his employer, Claimant admitted that no doctor had prescribed a cane for him to use in walking. He admitted that Dr. Blatt, his treating neurosurgeon, released him from treatment for his injuries in 1998. He admitted that Dr. Blatt did not recommend any surgery.

Claimant described his motor vehicle accidents in more detail on cross-examination. He admitted that his pickup truck was totaled in the August 2000 accident. He admitted that the accident occurred on the highway. He admitted that his vehicle was stationary when the accident occurred and that it was struck with such force that his seat broke and that he was thrown backwards with such force that the back of his head struck and broke the rear window. He admitted that after his head struck and broke the rear window, that he was thrust forward with such force that his chest struck and bent the steering wheel. He admitted that the force of the impact with his vehicle caused his truck to strike the vehicle in front of him. He admitted that his headrest on his vehicle was pushed down against the seat at the time of the impact and that it did not prevent his head from going backwards and into the rear window.

Claimant admitted that he was not wearing a seat belt at the time of the accident. He admitted that he had increased symptoms involving his head and neck after the accident. He admitted that his alleged headaches increased in frequency and intensity after the accident. He admitted that the alleged soreness in his neck increased. He admitted that he received a monetary settlement due to the accident. He admitted that he had neck surgery after the motor vehicle accidents. He admitted that his back surgery was after the motor vehicle accidents.

Claimant admitted that his employer did not authorize or pay for either of his neck surgeries. He acknowledged that Dr. Koprivica, his rating physician, had indicated that his neck pain and his severe headaches were related to the motor vehicle accident and not the alleged work-related accidents.

Claimant admitted that subsequent to 1998 he was diagnosed with depression, diabetes and hypertension. He admitted that he still mowed his lawn. He admitted that he used a push and not a selfpropelled mower. He admitted that he was still able to drive. He admitted that he cooked in his microwave oven. He admitted that he was still able to do his own grooming. He admitted that his GED and community college classes were taught in English. He stated that he maintained a 4.0 grade point average at the community college.

Medical evidence

Claimant offered into evidence two reports of P. Brent Koprivica, M.D., as well as reports from Daniel D. Zimmerman, M.D. and Bernard Abrams, M.D. and numerous reports and records. Exhibit P contained Dr. Koprivica's January 4, 2002 report. Dr. Koprivica, whose specialty was in emergency medicine, noted that on examination Claimant had "disparity" findings. He concluded that Claimant had sustained a herniated disk to the left at L5-S1 in the "August 22, 1998" accident at work. ${ }^{1}$ He concluded that Claimant was not at maximum medical improvement. He concluded that Claimant's "December 1997 or January 1998" work related accident had not resulted in any "significant" permanent injuries.

Dr. Koprivica did render a disability rating for the alleged August 1998 accident, although as noted above, he believed that Claimant was not at maximum medical improvement. ${ }^{2}$ He also stated that Claimant's need for treatment to his cervical spine was caused by the August 2000 motor vehicle accident and not the alleged August 1998 work-related accident.

Claimant's Exhibit X was Dr. Koprivica's May 8, 2007 report. Again, Dr. Koprivica indicated that Claimant's two cervical spine surgeries and the other treatment for Claimant's alleged neck problems after August 2000 was caused by the motor vehicle and not the alleged work-related accident. He related the treatment for Claimant's lumbar spine complaints to the alleged work-related accident.

Dr. Koprivica noted that on examination in May 2007 that Claimant did not exhibit the "exaggerated" pain behaviors Claimant had demonstrated during the prior examination. He noted in 2007 that Claimant's Waddell's testing was appropriate in all fiv

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 to Theresa Thompson for a low back injury sustained on July 20, 2010 while lifting and shelving copper coils. The claimant was entitled to temporary total disability benefits, permanent partial disability compensation, and medical aid totaling over $223,000, with additional underpayment and back pay amounts owed.

back12,259 words

Brown v. Noranda Aluminum, Inc.(2023)

February 3, 2023#16-027102

affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award granting permanent total disability compensation to Donald Brown for his work-related injuries to his back and left elbow. The Commission rejected the Second Injury Fund's argument that an anxiety disability should be considered in the PTD determination, finding that non-qualifying psychiatric disabilities need not be factored into the analysis.

back7,339 words

The Commission modified the ALJ's award to allow compensation for unpaid past medical expenses for employee Rodney Battles, who sustained a work-related back injury on October 5, 2016, requiring two back surgeries. The decision clarifies that an employer's duty to provide statutorily-required medical aid is absolute and unqualified under Missouri workers' compensation law.

back6,444 words

Gourley v. Cox Medical Center(2021)

December 15, 2021#07-031701

affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award allowing workers' compensation benefits for Carol Gourley's injury sustained on January 13, 2007 at Cox Medical Center. One commissioner dissented, arguing the ALJ erred in denying payment for unpaid medical bills ($173,896.25) and temporary total disability benefits ($109,574.64) related to the compensable 2007 injury.

back12,971 words

Comer v. Central Programs, Inc.(2021)

August 11, 2021#16-085212

affirmed

The Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's award of permanent total disability compensation, finding the employee's November 1, 2016 back injury combined with qualifying preexisting disabilities met statutory requirements for Second Injury Fund liability. The employee's preexisting lower left extremity and thoracic disabilities, each exceeding fifty weeks of permanent partial disability, directly aggravated and accelerated the primary work-related back injury resulting in permanent total disability.

back14,532 words