884 N.W.2d 153
Neb. Ct. App.2016Background
- Maradiaga, a box feeder, arrived for a 12-hour shift and parked in her employer Specialty Finishing’s lot; she exited her car, stepped, twisted her left ankle, and later was diagnosed with an unstable ankle fracture requiring surgery.
- Immediate accounts conflict: some reports state she felt pain when standing and then fell; others indicate she fell and then was injured.
- Employer HR and medical records largely described a twist of the ankle upon exiting the car; only one medical record described slipping.
- Workers’ Compensation Court found Maradiaga injured her ankle while taking a step (before any fall), found no hazardous condition in the parking lot, and concluded employment did not contribute to the injury.
- The court dismissed her petition with prejudice; Maradiaga appealed, arguing the injury had a neutral cause and should be compensable under the positional risk doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Maradiaga’s ankle fracture "arose out of" employment under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48‑101 | Maradiaga: injury had a neutral cause and, because it occurred on employer premises in the course of employment, positional risk presumption applies | Specialty: no employment-related hazard, ordinary nonemployment risk (exiting car); evidence shows injury occurred from a step, not an unexplained fall | Court affirmed dismissal: injury did not "arise out of" employment; positional risk doctrine inapplicable because cause was not a purely unexplained neutral risk and claimant failed to show employment contribution |
Key Cases Cited
- Logsdon v. ISCO Co., 260 Neb. 624, 618 N.W.2d 667 (applies positional risk to purely unexplained falls where claimant cannot show cause)
- Nippert v. Shinn Farm Constr. Co., 223 Neb. 236, 388 N.W.2d 820 (adopts positional risk for known neutral risks like tornado)
- Zoucha v. Touch of Class Lounge, 269 Neb. 89, 690 N.W.2d 610 (explains conjunctive tests "arising out of" and "in the course of" employment)
- Murphy v. City of Grand Island, 274 Neb. 670, 742 N.W.2d 506 (fact-specific inquiry whether injury arose out of and in course of employment)
- Cox v. Fagen Inc., 249 Neb. 677, 545 N.W.2d 80 (everyday activity can be compensable only if employment contributed to the risk)
- McGinn v. Douglas County Social Services Admin., 211 Neb. 72, 317 N.W.2d 764 (contrasted with Nippert on neutral risk/increased-risk approaches)