Bryant v. MIDWEST STAFF SOLUTIONS, INC.
257 P.3d 255
Kan.2011Background
- Bryant, about 38, had a prior back injury with surgery and ongoing pain.
- He worked as a service technician for Midwest Staff Solutions/Axiom HR Solutions starting in 2001; he missed days due to back pain.
- On March 2, 2003 Bryant felt a sudden back pain while on a service call; his condition worsened after May 13, 2003 during welding work.
- He underwent multi-level spinal fusion surgery on September 23, 2003 and was discharged from further care in spring 2004.
- Bryant returned to work as a dispatcher in 2004 with reduced wages; he resigned in 2005 for better opportunities that did not materialize.
- Bryant filed for workers' compensation May 19, 2003; ALJ awarded; Board affirmed with a higher total award; Court of Appeals reversed on the ‘normal activities of daily living’ issue; this court granted review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether March 2 and May 13, 2003 incidents were compensable injuries. | Bryant's incidents caused a change in his condition requiring surgery. | Injuries were not new injuries but aggravations of preexisting back pain. | Yes; incidents constituted compensable injuries. |
| Whether injuries arising from normal activities of daily living bars compensation. | Injuries were work-related nel-specific risks; not ordinary daily living. | The injuries fall within normal day-to-day activities and are not compensable. | No; injuries arose from work-related activities, not merely daily living. |
| Whether HB 2134 retroactively altered the scope of compensation. | retroactivity could affect rights now; protect vested rights. | Statutory changes apply; new prevailing factor standard. | Statutory scheme in place at injury controls; not retroactively applied. |
| Whether the Court of Appeals misapplied the standard for “arises out of” employment. | Court of Appeals relied on day-to-day living interpretation; broader context applied. | Court of Appeals properly applied existing precedent. | Court of Appeals reversed; Bryant's injury covered, remand of wage issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Demars v. Rickel Manufacturing Corporation, 223 Kan. 374 (Kan. 1978) (injury may be an aggravation or acceleration of a preexisting condition)
- Taber v. Tole Landscape Co., 181 Kan. 616 (Kan. 1957) (employment must expose to a greater hazard than usual; proximate cause doctrine)
- Siebert v. Hoch, 199 Kan. 299 (Kan. 1967) (two-part requirement: arises out of and arises in the course of employment)
- Boeckmann v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 210 Kan. 733 (Kan. 1972) (degenerative condition not born of employment; day-to-day activities unrelated to injury)
- Hensley v. Carl Graham Glass, 226 Kan. 256 (Kan. 1979) (three risk categories; employment can increase exposure to hazards)
- Anderson v. Scarlett Auto Interiors, 31 Kan. App. 2d 5 (Kan. App. 2002) (employment exposure to risk where daily activity is implicated)
- Poff v. IBP, Inc., 33 Kan. App. 2d 700 (Kan. App. 2005) (standing duration as aggravating factor not every-day activity; context matters)
- Johnson v. Johnson County, 36 Kan. App. 2d 786 (Kan. App. 2006) (degenerative condition aggravated by a job-related movement; increased exposure required)