Hornbeck v. Spectra Painting, Inc.
2012 Mo. LEXIS 159
| Mo. | 2012Background
- Hornbeck worked as a painter/drywall taper for Spectra Painting and suffered a November 2006 scaffold fall from a makeshift platform.
- ALJ found Spectra paid medical expenses and TTD; Hornbeck reached MMI in April 2007 and was denied further medicals post-MMI.
- ALJ imposed a 5% multiplicity factor and awarded 42.4 weeks of PPD from the Second Injury Fund (SIF); no 15% penalty applied for scaffolding act violation.
- Commission held Spectra violated the scaffolding act and awarded the 15% penalty, and affirmed most ALJ determinations except as to the penalty application and medical causation post-MMI.
- Spectra and Hornbeck appealed; court questions whether the 15% penalty applies to SIF awards and related post-MMI medicals and fees.
- Court affirms Commission’s decision as modified, holding the 15% penalty does not apply to the SIF award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 15% penalty applies to SIF awards | Hornbeck: penalty should apply to SIF award. | Spectra: penalty cannot enhance SIF awards. | Penalty inapplicable to SIF award. |
| Whether post-MMI medical treatments were reasonably required | Hornbeck: treatments after April 2007 flowed from work injury. | Spectra: post-MMI treatments not reasonably required or causally linked. | Commission’s denial upheld; post-MMI treatments not reasonably required. |
| Whether the Commission properly applied medical causation standards | Hornbeck argues prevailing factor standard was misapplied; Tillotson supports flow-from approach. | Spectra argues Commission used proper standard and credibility determinations. | Prevailing factor framework interpreted; capably supported by credibility findings; post-MMI claims denied. |
| Whether MMI date adopted by ALJ should be affirmed | Dr. Volarich disputes April 2007 MMI date. | Majority physicians supported April 2007 MMI date. | ALJ/Commission determination of April 2007 MMI affirmed. |
| Whether Hornbeck is entitled to additional TTD, fees, or future medical expenses | Should receive more TTD and related fees/costs. | Evidence supports denial; examiner credibility favors Spectra physicians. | Additional TTD, fees, and future medical expenses denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tillotson v. St. Joseph Medical Center, 347 S.W.3d 511 (Mo.App. 2011) (distinguishes medical treatment causation from injury causation; flow-from approach)
- Bowers v. Hiland Dairy Co., 188 S.W.3d 79 (Mo.App. 2006) (flow-from standard for reimbursement applies to treatment needs)
- Pulitzer Pub. Co. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm’n, 596 S.W.2d 413 (Mo. banc 1980) (defers to Commission on credibility and evidentiary weight)
- Johnson v. Denton Constr. Co., 911 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. banc 1995) (deference to Commission findings on credibility and evidence)
- Pierson v. Treasurer of State, 126 S.W.3d 386 (Mo. banc 2004) (framework for SIF computation and synergistic disability)