Mercedes Amaya Hernandez v. NSR Solutions, Inc. and Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc
0044214
| Va. Ct. App. | Jul 13, 2021Background
- Claimant (custodian) fell on December 19, 2019 while descending concrete stairs covered with a pink vinyl/plastic tread at Fort Belvoir; she says the vinyl surface caused her to slip.
- She was holding the handrail, hit her forehead and arm on a wall, landed sitting, later required a total right-shoulder replacement and physical therapy.
- Employer witnesses said the stairs had a vinyl stair tread but that there was nothing wrong or unusually hazardous about the steps.
- The deputy commissioner denied workers’ compensation benefits, finding claimant failed to prove the accident arose out of employment; the full Commission affirmed, concluding claimant did not prove the vinyl covering presented an enhanced or peculiar risk.
- Claimant argued the Commission misapplied the actual-risk test and relied on County of Chesterfield v. Johnson (which she contended used an increased-risk/negligence-like standard); the Court of Appeals affirmed, citing binding precedent and the interpanel accord doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether claimant's fall "arose out of" employment because the vinyl-covered stairs were a unique hazard | Vinyl/plastic stair covering made stairs unusually slippery and caused the fall | No evidence the vinyl created an enhanced or peculiar risk; testimony that nothing was wrong with the steps | No — claimant failed to show a defect or unique hazard; Commission's factual finding supported by record |
| Whether the Commission failed to apply the "actual risk" test and instead followed a discredited increased-risk test (Johnson) | Johnson was wrongly decided and the Commission misapplied the actual-risk standard | Commission properly relied on controlling precedent (Johnson) | Court rejects the challenge; bound by Supreme Court precedent and will not overturn Johnson |
| Whether the Commission required negligence-style proof rather than the no-fault actual-risk standard | Commission improperly imposed negligence principles | Commission applied established actual-risk/peculiar-hazard rules from precedent | Court rejects claimant's contention and affirms the Commission |
| Whether this Court may overturn Supreme Court precedent or prior panels that follow it | Requests overruling of Johnson and related appellate precedents | This Court is bound by the Supreme Court and interpanel accord; cannot overrule those decisions | Denied — Court declines to revisit or overturn controlling precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- County of Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 Va. 180 (1989) (establishes that a fall on stairs is compensable only if a defect or peculiar hazard of the workplace caused the fall)
- Bernard v. Carlson Companies-TGIF, 60 Va. App. 400 (2012) (applies Johnson and actual-risk requirement to falls on stairs)
- Norris v. ETEC Mech. Corp., 69 Va. App. 591 (2018) (reiterates Virginia's use of the actual-risk test)
- Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. v. Wilson, 64 Va. App. 103 (2014) (actual-risk requires causal connection between working conditions and injury)
- Roane v. Roane, 12 Va. App. 989 (1991) (Court of Appeals bound by decisions of the Supreme Court of Virginia)
- Jones v. Crothall Laundry, 69 Va. App. 767 (2019) (standards for appellate review of Commission factual findings)