JOHNSON v. MIDWEST CITY DEL CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2021 OK 29
| Okla. | 2021Background
- Darlene Johnson, a cafeteria worker, was clocked in and on a supervisor‑authorized smoke break when she walked off school grounds, smoked on a nearby city street (per school smoke‑free policy), then re‑entered and fell in the school parking lot, fracturing her arm and injuring her shoulder.
- Johnson filed for AWCA benefits; the ALJ found her fall occurred "inside the employer's facility," her break was authorized, and her injuries were compensable; ALJ awarded medical treatment and TTD.
- The Workers' Compensation Commission en banc reversed, holding the parking lot was not "inside the employer's facility," relying on dictionary definitions and finding the ALJ's conclusions unsupported by evidence.
- The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the Commission.
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court vacated the Court of Civil Appeals' opinion and reversed the Commission, holding the ALJ's findings were supported by the clear weight of the evidence and that the Commission exceeded its authority in reversing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a school parking lot is "inside the employer's facility" under 85A O.S. §2(13)(d) (authorized break exception) | Johnson: parking lot and grounds are part of the employer's facility; she was clocked in and on an authorized break complying with employer smoke ban, so injury is within course & scope | Employer: employee duties were inside cafeteria building; parking lot is not "inside the facility," so injury on break falls outside course & scope | Court: parking lot/grounds are part of the educational facility for §2(13)(d); ALJ's finding that injury occurred inside employer's facility is supported; injury compensable |
| Whether the Commission lawfully reversed the ALJ (standard of review/authority) | ALJ decision was supported by uncontroverted facts and clear weight of evidence; Commission misapplied law and relied on unsupported factual findings | Commission reviewed and concluded ALJ was wrong to treat parking lot as part of facility; Court of Civil Appeals upheld that conclusion | Court: Commission acted in excess of authority by reversing ALJ absent a finding that ALJ decision was against the clear weight of evidence or contrary to law; reversal reversed and remanded |
| Applicability/retroactivity of 2019 amendment to §2(13)(d) clarifying parking‑lots/controlled areas | Johnson argued the 2019 amendment clarified and supported her position | Employer argued amendment not retroactive/does not apply | Court noted the 2019 amendment but declined to decide retroactivity; resolution rests on pre‑amendment interpretation favoring ALJ |
Key Cases Cited
- Legarde‑Bober v. Oklahoma State Univ., 378 P.3d 562 (Okla. 2016) (treats sidewalks/adjacent areas as on employer premises for AWCA analysis)
- Turner v. B Sew Inn, 18 P.3d 1070 (Okla. 2000) (employer parking lot may constitute employer premises)
- Fudge v. Univ. of Okla., 673 P.2d 149 (Okla. 1983) (injury crossing city street to reach employer‑designated parking lot compensable)
- Polymer Fabricating, Inc. v. Emp'rs. Workers' Comp. Ass'n., 980 P.2d 109 (Okla. 1998) (clarifying amendments may be given retrospective effect when removing statutory ambiguity)
- Brown v. Claims Mgmt. Resources Inc., 391 P.3d 111 (Okla. 2017) (standard for appellate review of Commission factual findings)
- Peoplelink, LLC v. Bear, 373 P.3d 1019 (Okla. 2014) (deference to trial court findings; limits on overturning agency fact determinations)