283 P.3d 924
Or. Ct. App.2012Background
- Claimant, a patient-care coordinator at Legacy Good Samaritan Medical Center, slipped in an employer-owned parking lot during a paid 15-minute break while walking to a nearby credit union to deposit a personal check.
- The injury occurred on Green Gable House parking lot, a facility associated with the employer but not used by claimant for work duties.
- The board initially held the injury compensable under the parking lot rule, finding it occurred on employer premises and during course of employment.
- On Noble I, this court reaffirmed that the injury occurred in the course of employment but remanded for a determination of whether it arose out of employment.
- On remand, the board concluded the injury arose out of employment due to the route taken and the parking lot’s relation to the employer, and the employer challenged this as erroneous law.
- We hold that the injury did not arise out of employment because the risk was not connected to claimant’s work or work environment and the parking lot had no environmental nexus to her employment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the injury arose out of employment under the unitary work-connection test | Claimant contends the risk arose from employment-related conditions. | Employer argues the risk was a personal/neutral risk not connected to work. | Not arising out of employment; risk not connected to work or environment. |
| Whether the parking-lot context and route to a personal errand satisfy the unitary test | In-course risk logic supports arising out of employment due to course and route. | Personal errand breaks the causal connection to employment. | Dispositive link missing; case reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Legacy Health Sys. v. Noble, 232 Or App 93 (2009) (Noble I; injury occurred in course of employment but arising out of employment required)
- Hayes, 325 Or 592 (1997) (parking-lot risk arising from employment-related factors)
- Redman Indus., Inc. v. Lang, 326 Or 32 (1997) (unitary test; risks connected to work or work environment)
- Sandberg v. JC Penney Co. Inc., 243 Or App 342 (2011) (focus on causal connection to employment; risk connected to work or environment)
- Krushwitz v. McDonald’s Restaurants, 323 Or 520 (1996) (unitary work-connection; both prongs required)
- Allen v. SAIF, 29 Or App 631 (1977) (purpose-based application of “arising out of and in the course of employment”)
- Robinson v. Nabisco, Inc., 331 Or 178 (2000) (time, place, and circumstances; causal nexus)
- Norpac Foods, Inc. v. Gilmore, 318 Or 363 (1994) (parking lot injury alone not compensable without causal connection)