*1 MILLER, Justice. LATHER, Appellee, Claimant
Denis impression In this case of first we re- court’s holding appellee verse the trial v. (Lather) Denis Lather is entitled to work- COLLEGE, Employer, HURON physical er’s benefits for juries as a sustained result of a suicide triggered by attempt, disability, a mental Group, Insurance U.S. allegedly occasioned work-related Insurer, Appellants. stress. No. 15627. FACTS of Supreme Court South Dakota. physical occurred car, jumped moving 1984 when he from a May 19, Argued 1987. transporting was him to the Human which Sept. Decided Center for treatment of mental Services 6, 1987. Rehearing Denied Nov. illness. graduated high school Lather College in 1970 and Dakota in 1974. State higher He continued his education and ulti- mately Degree received a in sec- Master’s edu- ondary administration and University from the of South Dako- cation leaving University, he re- Upon ta. College Dakota as an as- turned to State football and coach and sistant basketball physical edu- an instructor of health and signed cation. In June Lather High teaching contract with Redfield School, responsibility included the Two months coaching football the fall. Huron, later, College Da- Huron South kota, him the as head bas- offered life-long It coach. had been ketball team, coach a basketball dream to College offer he discussed Huron so High officials with Redfield School per- of these members. Some school board leave angered desire to at his sons revoking his and mention made taking him to court teaching certificate and . him to his contract. Ulti- require honor in which mately, agreement was reached Lather to release high school consented high teach- continue his school if he would finish mid-September until duties Accord- as head coach. the season football began teaching at ingly, he Gallagher Battey, Battey H. & Russell bas- working as head mid-September Redfield, appellee. for claimant and Because early coach October. ketball high school football season M. Timothy Geb- Michael J. Schaffer October, drove Evans, the end Davenport, Hurwitz & over until hart (approximately Falls, to Redfield Smith, from Huron appellants. Sioux *2 Also, trip) four a week to required. miles round times cessful record. Lather was practices remaining games. arrange and to a attend the basketball tournament over holiday football season at Red- the Christmas for he no He had a successful had prior experience. In apparently field was well liked his addition to other and stressors, his team losing was athletes. games. of its Lather found that conditions were not began developing Lather a mental anticipated had he took disor- he when over the der, presumably because of these stresses. program College. at basketball Huron sought counseling He first on First, December gear game practice and had uniforms 14, 1983, when Community he went to He next been stolen. discovered that of Counseling (coun- Center in Services Huron players on the fourteen his roster three had service). seling There he was interviewed school, graduated high even from one professionals including various Frank from and oth- was AWOL the service two (Dame), psychologist. Dame a clinical academically ineligible. ers were This left Among things, complained other Lather scrimmage. players too with which to few inability sleep to and blackouts. Dr. Her- disciplinary encountered prob- Lather also man, psychiatrist, prescribed a medicine for remaining players. lems of his with some sleep disorder. Lather was also exam- session, During practice player a he one by neurologist, ined a who possi- found the disciplined had threatened Lather awith bility organic brain disorder. Dame Although knife. the student withdrew outpatient then counseled Lather on an ba- November, from in Lather was sis, and he recommended that return to president did dissatisfied the school’s holiday. visit his mother over Christmas against not take a firmer stance stu- During one re- dent. On occasion Lather was a session with Dame on Decem- 27, 1983, quired discipline players psychologist ber certain noted that drinking, leaving Lather’s had only players five available condition deteriorated since (which, begun their last game opinion, for one in visit and he had experience fact, defeat). thinking. suicidal In Lath- team’s caused the narrow Lather had er written a suicide note. rec- difficulty Dame players also had on work- hospitalized ommended that Lather be at study, requested sign who Lather to their Hospital Falls, McKennan Sioux South requiring per- time them sheets without Dakota. form specified work. hospitalized Lather was from December facilities afforded Lather col- through January treating and his lege expectations. also failed to meet his psychiatrist Kennedy. was Dr. ex- Lather area, storage totally His was in office psychotic behavior hos- hibited while unequipped except telephone. for a He pital and hallucinated that objects various furnishings had collect oth- himself from persons present they were outfitting er on campus. locations After However, January not. on Ken- office, portions ceiling his fell down nelly discharged hospital Lather from the pipes leaked water into the office. He depression agitation because his had particularly was distressed over the situa- He subsided. was instructed continue tion because the office was he where would outpatient at counseling treatment ser- prospective interview recruits. vice in Huron. short, understandably Lather found Upon Huron, his return to he and Dame experience College extremely at Huron possibility discussed the resigning guilt stressful. He also felt at and stress at College. Huron Lather was
leaving
high
post.
school
In addition to
leaning
resigning
towards
that time
above,
the instances set forth
Lather also
resigned
ultimately
January
placed
great
pressure upon
deal of
him-
self to have a successful win/loss record.
Huron,
Lather continued to reside in
apparently
heightened
This
was
fact
his mother now lived with him. On Janu-
predecessor
Dame,
that his
extremely
suc-
ary
his mother contacted
indicat-
stimulus,
by any
developed
sudden
severe diffi-
but
experiencing
disorganized
gradually
in his
over time.
sleeping,
culties
behavior,
had increased
thinking and
ISSUE
committing suicide.
about
his comments
Herman and
with Dr.
consulted
Although
Dame
and its insurer
Lather to the
to commit
made
appeal,
decision was
many
raise
issues
the central
Yankton,
South
Center
determinative,
Human Services
issue, which is
is as follows:
*3
The coun-
treatment.
Dakota,
inpatient
IS A MENTAL DISABILITY PRODUC-
to commit Lather on
preparing
selors were
BY
ED SOLELY
MENTAL STIMULII
if he
have re-
would
involuntary basis
OR STRESS COMPENSABLE UNDER
voluntarily. Al-
admitted
fused to be
OUR WORKER’S COMPENSATION
prospect, Lath-
upset at the
though initially
LAW?
he
plan
that
be voluntar-
agreed with
er
not.
We hold it is
ily committed.
assigned to
sheriffs were
deputy
Two
DECISION
to the Human Services
transport Lather
It is settled law in this state that our
consulting
the medical
After
with
Center.
in
compensation law is remedial
center,
counseling
the decision
staff at
liberally
nature and should be
construed
place Lather in restraints.
not to
was made
purpose.
effectuate its
Wold v. Meilman
drove,
deputies
Lather
One of
Industries,
(S.D.
112
Food
269 N.W.2d
passenger side of the front
sitting in the
1978);
Inc., 80 S.D.
Dairy
Oviatt v. Oviatt
sitting in the
deputy
and the other
seat
83,
(1963); Meyer
649
v. Roet
119 N.W.2d
dep-
directly
Lather. The
seat
behind
back
tele,
36,
isting condition.
Like
Minnesota Su
WUEST, C.J.,
MORGAN, J.,
preme
Independent
Court in Lockwood v.
concur.
877,
School Dist. No.
(Minn. 1981), arewe unable to determine or SABERS, JJ., HENDERSON and hold legislature enacting the law dissent. present its form HENDERSON, (dissenting). Justice ... impose employers intended to lia- I respectfully vote a dissent in this case bility employee’s for compensation for an realizing statutory that the elusive inter- disabling resulting condition pretation, we, as Justices of this work-related mental stress. Under the with, cope foursquare Court must before prior employee law had com- no claimed us. pensation disability, for such and it unlikely
seems con- A Decision was entered the trial court templated possibility December, day of such claims on 5th 1986. Formal revision_ Findings when it enacted the ... of Fact and Conclusions Law Reallocating the resulting costs from were also entered on the same date 1-26-36, stress-related between health trial court. Under SDCL a trial relevant, *Although probably not it applied is not as bulk of his medical bills and he has though receiving monthly disability Lather is without financial assistance. and is benefits He pay security. health insurance from social agency of an A. may court affirm decision Workers’ Compensation Law: proceed- Cases, for further or remand case 30, Materials and Text at 199 ings; may court further reverse or (1984) a trial (emphasis added) (footnote omitted) modify rights if decision substantial (quoting Burns, 8, In re 11, 218 Mass. prejudiced; and a appellant have been 601, (1914)). N.E. Surely, Lather’s dif its permitted trial court is to enter own ficulties fall within the above definition of findings and conclusions of law or it of fact “injury,” approved by the words of Profes findings and conclusions may affirm the Larson, especially sor in light viewed part judg- agency entered of its of the state, well-established law of this Here, trial court entered its own ment. laws should be law, findings of fact and conclusions of liberally construed to pur effectuate its refusing adopt agency’s findings and pose. Meyer Roettele, See v. 64 S.D. enter, by conclusions and did its formal 191, 193(1935). Perforce, 264 N.W. decision, The reversal a reversal. remand- reasoned, trial court Denis Lather was enti Deputy ed the case to the Director of the tled to worker’s benefits for Management Division Labor $8,921.05 disability, allegedly in medical Department South Dakota of Labor for surgical expenses as of June proceedings “further in accordance with hospital expenses $45,976.90 as of the this Decision.” same date. Essentially, the trial court determined record, In reviewing this it is noted that that Denis Lather’s mental breakdown appears there transcript to be no of testi- of, of, arose out and in the course his mony transcribed at the circuit court level. *5 employment further, College; with Huron However, judge the circuit court did do his employ that the mental breakdown was an duty by reviewing “extensive and briefs” injury ment-related which was the substan files, reviewing records, briefs, “all of the of attempted tial cause suicide and depositions herein....” There are flowing injuries.* conclusion, With this I depositions seven on file. The circuit court agree. by Legislature, We are told via judge just could read them as well as the 2-14-1, statute, SDCL that a word a hearings deposi- examiner. Of the seven such “injury,” as to be understood in “[is] tions, deposi- six of them were “medical” ordinary sense.” See Oahe Conserv [its] deposition by tions. One was Associate Janklow, ancy Subdist. v. 308 N.W.2d Physical Professor of Education and Wres- (S.D.1981). Thus, the trial court con tling College. at Huron There Coach hearings cluded that the examiner made a eight lay approximately witnesses called decision affected error of law. SDCL addition, hearings examiner. In before 1-26-36(4). Buttressing statutory interpre file, consisting there are four of exhibits “ordinary tation and sense” with “common form, consultations, and letter two a Divi- sense,” following: I wish to cite Investigation of sion Criminal interview. general One of the best definitions of The trial court had to examine some “cold “injury” provided early Massa- exhibits” and so does this Court. The hear- opinion: chusetts ings had the examiner benefit of observa- speech ‘inju- “In common word judging credibility of of demeanor ry,’ applied personal injury as to a to a approximately eight lay witnesses. being, human includes whatever lesion majority opinion determines that a change any part system
or produces pain work-induced stress related disfunction harm or or a lessened any compensable under our com- facility of the natural use of bodi- not ly activity capability.” pensation majority jurisdictions, or A law. * declarations, Contrary Legislature, presume opinion’s stat we that words used in 62-1-1(2) does not define In- convey ordinary popular utes were used to their stead, temporal that statute discourses on as- meaning. Conservancy Subdist. v. Jank Oahe pects injury necessary trigger compensa- low, (S.D.1981). 308 N.W.2d arriving tion. See id. When at the intent of the facts, permit likely lege
under similar would because plight compensation. receive We was the substantial cause of the attempted key factor to com forget should that a not suicide. awards, cases, pensation types in these College Huron employer is an within the employee from which an is that stress definition SDCL 62-1-2 and Lather is an sufficiently greater, succumbed is intense employee within the definition of SDCL damaging than the stress or more encoun suggestion 62-1-3. There is some that employees engaged every tered most well-balanced, Lather was not all-around day employment life. See IB A. individual; suggestion that, there is per- Compensation The Law Workmen’s haps, susceptible, he was inherently, to a (1987). 42.23(b), vein, at In 7-668 this § However, nervous breakdown. Huron Col- College at involved him, lege recruited extremely ag- and were Indeed, hyper-stressful situations. Denis gressive wooing away him from Redfield subjected degradation, Lather was hu High College upon School. Huron worked miliation, by person stress identifiable his dreams to abe coach. Huron College, nel Huron to include its Presi College Lather, took they Denis found dent, him to which caused have a mental suggestion him. So the preexisting of a to be breakdown. He refused dishonest condition, sign does not hold under work sheets when athletes would water not work was confronted with three settled law of this state. Harden v. South high gradu players Inc., who were school Dakota League, Credit Union ates, player, one a.w.o.l. and two aca In S.D. N.W.2d 665 demically ineligible players. Lather was connection, I cite Professor Larson’s trea- president told coaches were a tise, 42.23(c), supra at 7-670-71: player dime dozen after he wanted a In line with the normal expelled pulling a knife on him. principle aggravation preexist- of a sum, at win Huron elevated ing weakness or compensable disease is a principles. over all Lather encountered dis injury, it is clear the majority rule is ciplinary problems players stay because not weakened the fact that claim- night drinking out late intoxicants. may preexisting ant have had a neurosis *6 gear being Athletic stolen and he was or latent nervous weakness which the inventory. accountable for the Lather was employment physical acted without trau- caught ugly, depraved inup situation, produce ma to the ultimate This upon single incident, not based one but a is the standard rule physical when a trau- series of beyond incidents. It was stress precipitates prior condition, ma a and it ordinary day-to-day stress to oth which should nobe less so stimulus is er employees similarly are exposed. From nonphysical. appears There to be no re- a loved and successful coach at Redfield ported compensation decision School, High exposed he was ato situation type was denied in this solely of case College great which inflicted there was preexisting because neurotic upon emotional Ultimately trauma him. (Footnotes omitted.) tendency. being faced with hospital taken to our state ill, mentally for the jumped case, he from hearings a mov In this wholly examiner car, ing traveling per hour, 55 to 65 miles appreciate coaching failed to situation inflicting grievous physical injury upon that Lather was in and tried to wash it short, himself. In his injuries, both mental by intimating away pre- that Lather “was physical, did have a cause-result nexus. disposed handling to coaching stress in sit- poorly.” type uations This of mental block depression, trauma, Lather’s emotional in the mind hearings of the examiner sim- injury mental arose out of and in the ply any support distanced course of employment Huron Col- lege. situation; Physical furthermore, injuries stressful car-jump- from the it was a ing disregard incident also arose out of and in I just law as have now employment course with Huron Col- written. deranged, The
If, indeed,
hearing
officer
wrong
Lather became
in holding
compen-
Lather’s condition was not a
Bea-
authorities
the Huron
injury
person”
sable
because the “average
so,
thought
he is not
County authorities
dle
would
way.
not have reacted in the same
committing an “intentional”
responsible for
if
test,
Even
not,
this were
and it is
suffer
People who
upon himself.
tort
disputes
common sense
that conclusion. I
who
despair,
are be-
depression and
deep
would
trial
affirm the
court’s conclusions
judgment, should not be
good
reft of their
injuries
compensable
that Lather’s
inflicting intentional
held accountable
compensa-
under South Dakota’s worker
Surely,
this
upon themselves.
torts
tion laws.
working
far
conditions
from a
coach
gives
The majority opinion
lip service to
in a
coaching position
college in
normal
the accepted proposition that “our worker’s
only perceive
He
or
Dakota.
did
South
compensation
is
law remedial
nature and
being
he was
imagine that
mistreated. He
liberally
should be
to
construed
effectuate
not,
he
And should
on the
was mistreated.
purpose.”
opinion
its
The majority
states
compensated for
justice, be
this
scales of
are mindful of
sensitive
to
“[w]e
caused his
which has
work-
mistreatment
mental
illness or
injury?
related
caused mental stress
real as other
is as
not be
Finally, Lather should
denied re- disabilities and that there is no real distinc-
tion
and mental
sham,
between
generalized fear of
lief
to a
due
especially
person
as it relates
compensa-
psychologically based worker’s
jured[,]” yet concludes that
find
“[W]e
is
That
not a viable concern in
claims.
nothing
legisla-
statutes
our
wherein
psycholog-
this
where a stress-induced
case
implied
pro-
an intention to
ture has even
leap
ical
disfunction culminated Lather’s
compensation coverage in
vide worker’s
uphold
moving
I
from a
vehicle. would
majority opinion
these
The
cases.”
defies
judge upon
court
this basis: This
circuit
logic,
this court
the mandated role of
young coach suffered a
laws,
interpreter
state’s
anxiety
traumatic strain and
caused
jurisdic-
caselaw
of other
“compensable” injury
which is a
under
attempt
hand
tions with this feeble
62-1-1(2).
legislature
the work of this court.1
not,
has
fact is
SABERS,
(dissenting).
Justice
expressly
impliedly,
or
stated an intention
I dissent.
worker’s
exclude
light
exemplary.
purposes
this course of action
less than
of the nature and
acts,
"injury"
adopt-
Declining
decisions
construe the term
would
the recent
interpretations
"injuries” repre-
represent
judicial
issue
flexible
circumvention of
approach.
purported goal
through
subject
sent the better
If the
matter
the convenience of
rele-
*7
employees
indemnify
gation.
directly
of the statute is to
who
deferral
conflicts with the
Such
incidents,
duty
judiciary’s
become disabled from work-related
to construe statutes and
vested
object
obligation
inquiry
questions
then the
of
should be the causal
is
resolve
of law. This
relationship
employment
suspended merely
the
between the
existence
because of the
of
of the
the
policy
classification
novel facts or
considerations. Because
—not
Imposing
based on arti-
compensation
definitional restrictions
are "remedial
worker's
laws
seriously
the
ficial distinctions
undermines
are entitled to a liberal construc-
character and
tion,”
prevent-
providing support
achievement of
ing
Supreme Court
the South Dakota
should
deny compen-
destitution. Such restrictions
employees
are disabled
determine that
who
merely
they
sation to disabled workers
because
compensation.
mental
entitled
In
stimuli are
to
happen
injured
proper
to
in the
did not
become
legislative
to the
the absence of
mandate
con-
way.
trary,
policies
ideals and
of worker’s com-
the
pensation
employees
that
disabled
dictate
Supreme
Unless the South
Court fol-
Dakota
entitled
all
incidents should be
to
refusing
work-related
example
lows the Minnesota
of
to con-
relief.
meaning
"injury”
strue the
of
in favor of defer-
Compensable
as
ring
Mental Disorders
Suicide
Legislature,
matter to
the
court will
Injuries
Compensation:
ultimately
Will
Under Worker’s
be forced
address
issue. De-
to
ferring
question might
South
636,
30 S.D.L.Rev.
be defensible
Dakota Follow
Trend?
because
involved,
policy
of the
considerations
however
641-42
contrary,
can be
in these cases. On
it
the Minnesota court held in 1981 that the
by repealing
phrase “by
argued
legislative
that
amending
intent in
its worker’s
legislature
intended
accident” in
compensation statute could not
deter-
be
coverage
compensation
provide
to
mined,
discussing
that court was
an amend-
in a less restrictive manner
intended ment
enacted
1953. This
being
court is
types
extended
these
of
be
interpret
asked to
an amendment which
cases.
was enacted
1975. While the Minnesota
might
justified
asserting
court
be
that
majority opinion attempts
hide
The
unlikely
“it seems
legislature
con-
“we
cliche that
are not law-
behind
old
templated the
of
possibility
such claims
case,
policy
nor
makers.”
makers
when it enacted the
revisionf,]”
such
simply
do not have to be. We
have to
we
hardly plausible
an excuse
here.
justice
interpreting
statutory
Lock-
serve
wood, supra at 927.
It
common law. To do less avoids re-
should also be
interpretation
our
noted that
sponsibility.
If
the Minnesota Su-
eyes
preme
is in error in the
waiting
legis-
law this case
Court
still
for the
legislature,
remedy
clarify
can
lature to
its
Egeland
intent.
v.
or policy (clearly
the situation
new law
City
Minneapolis,
The expending after carefully laying
much time and effort in facts, any
out the never addresses of these Instead,
approaches. it cites the Minnesota Independent
case of Lockwood v. School (Minn.1981), No.
Dist. 312 N.W.2d support its decision to not decide. however,
majority,
fails to note
subject
generally,
See
page
2. The
matter
the footnote on
8 is
The Law Work
1A
*8
Compensation
only
(1985);
men’s
§
“not relevant"
but is received in clear
36.00
1B
Compensation
The Law Workmen’s
violation
42.00 et
of the “collateral source rule.” Travel
seq.
(1987);
Sersland,
Disability
Mental
S.
Manning,
(Tex.
ers Insurance v.
S.W.2d
Caused Mental Stress: Standards
Gibson,
City
Civ.App.1978);
Twin
Fire Ins. Co. v.
Proof
Cases,
Compensation
Workers’
L.Rev.
Drake
Eichel v.
(Tex.Civ.App.1972);