Aaron Jones v. Special Security Patrol, Inc.

Issued by THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

(Affirming Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge with Supplemental Opinion)

**Injury No. 03-015767**

**Employee:** Aaron Jones

**Employer:** Special Security Patrol, Inc. (settled)

**Insurer:** Travelers Company (settled)

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

This workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by § 287.480 RSMo. Having read the briefs, reviewed the evidence, and considered the whole record, we find that the award of the administrative law judge denying compensation is supported by competent and substantial evidence and was made in accordance with the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law. Pursuant to § 286.090 RSMo, we affirm the award and decision of the administrative law judge with this supplemental opinion.

On May 31, 2019, an administrative law judge issued an award denying compensation to employee in this workers' compensation claim. On June 20, 2019, employee filed a timely application for review with the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission).

Employee attached the following motions to his application for review: 1) a Continuation of Application for Review with regard to Briefing and Additional Evidence¹ (first motion) and 2) Petitioner's Request for Specific Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Clarification of Rulings by the Administrative Law Judge and Commission (second motion).

On July 10, 2019, the Second Injury Fund filed a response to employee's application for review, arguing, among other things, that it opposed employee's first motion because it does not meet the requirements of subsections 8 CSR 20-3.030(2)(A) and (4) for the submission of additional evidence, and that the additional evidence employee requests was produced at the hearing before the administrative law judge. The Second Injury Fund also opposed employee's second motion, and argued that the administrative law judge's decision should be affirmed.

Commission Rule 8 CSR 20-3.030(2) provides as follows:

(2) Additional Evidence.

¹ The Commission addressed the briefing portion of the motion by employee in its January 13, 2020 order.

Injury No. 03-015767

Employee: Aaron Jones

- 2 -

(A) After an application for review has been filed with the commission, any interested party may file a motion to submit additional evidence to the commission. The hearing of additional evidence by the commission shall not be granted except upon the ground of newly discovered evidence which with reasonable diligence could not have been produced at the hearing before the administrative law judge. The motion to submit additional evidence shall set out specifically and in detail—

1. The nature and substance of the newly discovered evidence;
2. Names of witnesses to be produced;
3. Nature of the exhibits to be introduced;
4. Full and accurate statement of the reason the testimony or exhibits reasonably could not have been discovered or produced at the hearing before the administrative law judge;
5. Newly discovered medical evidence shall be supported by a medical report signed by the doctor and attached to the petition, shall contain a synopsis of the doctor's opinion, basis for the opinion and the reason for not submitting same at the hearing before the administrative law judge; and
6. Tender of merely cumulative evidence or additional medical examinations does not constitute a valid ground for the admission of additional evidence by the commission.

(B) The commission shall consider the motion to submit additional evidence and any answer of opposing parties without oral argument of the parties and enter an order either granting or denying the motion. If the motion is granted, the opposing party(ies) shall be permitted to present rebuttal evidence. As a matter of policy, the commission is opposed to the submission of additional evidence except where it furthers the interests of justice. Therefore, all available evidence shall be introduced at the hearing before the administrative law judge.

On July 25, 2019, this Commission sent a letter to employee, noting that this Commission does accept motions for additional evidence, but does not accept motions for leave, and motions such as employee's second motion. We also note that employee presented, or could have presented all of the evidence that he requests in the first motion at the hearing before the administrative law judge, and none of the evidence that he wishes to present before this Commission would be newly discovered. Therefore, we find that employee's first motion does not meet the requirements set out under 8 CSR 20-3.030(2) and it should be denied. In regards to employee's second motion, we find that it should be denied because we agree with the administrative law judge's findings of fact, in light of all of the evidence in the record, and affirm his decision.

- 3 -

We affirm and adopt the award of the administrative law judge as supplemented herein. The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Lee B. Schaefer is attached hereto and incorporated herein to the extent not inconsistent with this decision and award.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this **6th** day of August 2020.


**LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION**

*Robert W. Cornejo, Chairman*

*Reid K. Forrester, Member*

*Shalonn K. Curls, Member*

Attest:

*Secretary*

Issued by DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

Injury Number 03-015767

AWARD

Employee: Aaron Jones

Jury No.: 03-015767

Dependents: N/A

Employer: Special Security Patrol, Inc. (settled)

Address: 1000 W. 1st Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 2nd Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 3rd Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 4th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 5th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Invoice No.: 03-015767

Address: 1000 W. 5th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 6th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 7th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Invoice No.: 03-015767

Address: 1000 W. 8th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Address: 1000 W. 9th Street, Suite 1000, New York 10026

Invoice No.: 03-015767

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW

1. Are any benefits awarded herein? No

1. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? Yes

1. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes

1. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: January 18, 2003

1. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: St. Louis, Missouri

1. Was above employee in employment of above employer at the time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes

1. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes

1. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? Yes

1. Was Claim for Compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes

1. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes

1. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: Claimant was attacked by assailants attempting to steal money from a coin-operated machine in a laundry room.

1. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No

1. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Body as a Whole

1. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: Claimant settled with Employer/Insurer for $100,000 for "alleged permanent and/or total disability."

1. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: $2,914.23 (21 6/7 weeks)

1. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by Employer/Insurer? $18,586.70

Revised Form 21 (3/97)

Page 1

Issued by DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

1. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by Employer/Insurer? None
2. Employee's average weekly wages: 330.00
3. Weekly compensation rate: 220.00/$220.00
4. Method wages computation: By agreement and using the table

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

1. Second Injury Fund Liability:

None

Injury No.: 03-015767

Before the Division of Workers' Compensation Department of Labor and Industrial Relations of Missouri Jefferson City, Missouri

Checked by: LBS

An evidentiary Hearing was held in the above-referenced matter on February 19, 2019, and February 28, 2019. The record was not closed until February 28, 2019. Mr. Steven Brown appeared and represented Aaron Jones ("Claimant"). Assistant Attorney General Madalyn Campbell appeared and represented the Second Injury Fund ("Fund"). Claimant previously settled his Claim against Special Security Patrols, Inc. ("Employer") and its insurer, Travelers Company ("Insurer").

The parties stipulated to the following facts:

1. Claimant and Employer were operating under and subject to the provisions of the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law;
2. On January 18, 2003, Claimant was attacked by assailants attempting to steal money from a coin-operated machine in a laundry room;
3. Employer was provided proper notice of Claimant's injury;
4. Claimant's Claim for Compensation was filed in a timely manner;
5. At the relevant time, Claimant earned an average weekly wage of 330.00, which qualified for applicable rates of compensation of 220.00 for total disability benefits, and $220.00 for Permanent Partial Disability ("PPD") benefits;
6. Employer/Insurer paid Temporary Total Disability ("TTD") benefits in the amount of $2,914.23, or 21 6/7 weeks;
7. Employer/Insurer paid medical benefits in the amount of $18,586.70;
8. This matter was continued from the February 19, 2019 Hearing, and the record was left open until the Hearing was completed; the record was closed on February 28, 2019;
9. Venue for the Hearing in this matter is proper at the St. Louis Office of the Missouri Division of Workers' Compensation.

The issues to be resolved at this Hearing are:

1. What date did Claimant reach Maximum Medical Improvement ("MMI") from the primary injury?
2. What is the nature and extent, if any, of the liability of the Second Injury Fund?

Claimant offered and admitted into evidence, the following Exhibits ${ }^{1}$ :

Exhibit 1-1: "Miscellaneous documents" regarding Claimant's childhood

Exhibit 1-2: Summary of Lalk Exhibit 1

Exhibit 1-3: Excerpt from Elementary School Records - Butternut Elementary

Exhibit 1-4: School records - Ely Elementary and Edison Day Program

Exhibit 1-5: Excerpt from records from Berea School District

Exhibit 1-6: Records from Cleveland Metropolitan School District

Exhibit 1-7: "Complete Educational Records" from Cleveland Metropolitan School

Exhibit 1-8: Medical records of Cleveland MetroHealth Medical Center

Exhibit 1-9: Records from Director of Pupils - Berea School District

Exhibit 1-10: Excerpt from Social Security file of Berea Public Schools records

Exhibit 1-11: Medical records of Cleveland MetroHealth Medical Center

Exhibit 1-12: Social Security Records of Earnings

Exhibit 1-13: Excerpts from Claimant's Social Security file

Exhibit 1-14: Objection sustained - not admitted

Exhibit 2-15: St. Louis County Police Report

Exhibit 2-16: Photographs of head injury

Exhibit 2-17: Medical records of Christian Hospital

Exhibit 2-18: Medical records of Family Practice of South County

[^0]

[^0]: ${ }^{1}$ Claimant's attorney assured the Court that the records and documents contained in Claimant's Exhibits were not duplicative. However, throughout Claimant's evidence, there are multiple copies of the same document. Some documents are in as many as three separa