INJURY (RCW 51.08.100)
Burden of Proof
A worker failed to meet the burden of proof for establishing an industrial injury where all, except two, of the witnesses testifying about the injury had a direct financial interest in the outcome of the appeal or were friends and relatives of one of the parties. The two disinterested witnesses, although inconclusive about whether the job had concluded before the injury, raised a question about the worker's version of the incident. ....George Trangmar, 93 3287 (1994)
When considering allowance of a claim for industrial injury the focus is on whether a qualifying event occurred. The fact that preexisting infirmities were also a cause of the injury does not defeat a claim for benefits. ….Soledad Pineda, 08 19297 (2010) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Benton County Cause No. 11-2-00024-6.]
Idiopathic fall
An injury sustained in a fall which was caused by conditions personal to the worker (i.e., a seizure resulting from alcohol withdrawal) is compensable under the Act, as there is no statutory requirement that the injury "arise out of employment." ....Marion Lindblom, Dec'd.,45,619 (1976) [dissent]
Injury v. occupational disease
When the claim has not been clearly allowed as an industrial injury or occupational disease, the parties and the industrial appeals judge must clearly address the question of whether the claim is for an industrial injury or occupational disease. ….Moises Cobian, 10 13290 (2011)
Normal bodily movement
An attorney, who broke loose a dental crown when he bit into a piece of candy taken from a dish located on the reception desk of his employer, sustained an industrial injury. The issue in such a case was not whether the eating activity was in response to a requirement of the job, but rather, whether the eating activity was permissible and reasonably incidental to the duties of the job. Overruling In re Carol Rivkin, BIIA Dec., 85 1694 (1986) ....Philip Carstens, Jr., 89 0723 (1990) [special concurrence]
A normal bodily movement must be in response to the requirements of the job for any resulting injury to be compensable. Therefore, a secretary who breaks a tooth while eating popcorn on the job has not sustained an "injury" under RCW 51.08.100. ....Carol Rivkin, 85 1694 (1986) [Overruled, In re Philip Carstens, Jr., BIIA Dec., 89 0723 (1990)]
"Physical conditions"
Where the worker has shown through competent expert testimony that he developed a mental condition as a result of a sudden emotional stress during the course of employment, he has presented sufficient proof that he has suffered an industrial injury. The worker need not show that the stress was "unusual," or that it "arose out of" employment. ....Robert Hedblum, 88 2237 (1989) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Thurston County Cause No. 89-2-02751-5.]
The deflation of a breast implant caused by a blow in the course of employment constitutes an industrial injury and the worker is entitled to an implant replacement to permit her to regain her pre-injury appearance. ....Patsy Schmitz, 68,429 (1986) [dissent]
In addition to a tangible happening, there must be a resulting physical condition or bodily harm before an industrial accident can constitute an "injury," and the causal relationship between the physical condition and the accident must be established by medical testimony. ....Kenneth Heimbecker, 41,998 (1975)
Physical/mental conditions
Worker suffered a non-toxic exposure to fertilizer that caused her to believe she was injured, resulting in a conversion disorder, and mixed personality disorder. This belief that a condition resulted from the incident is sufficient to sustain a claim. ...Amada Pacheco, 03 11030 (2004)
Proximate cause: new injury v. aggravation – See AGGRAVATION
Psychiatric conditions (mental/mental)
Where a worker returned to a worksite where a hydrochloric acid spill had occurred, experienced a bad taste in her mouth, smelled a particular odor, and developed itchy skin and breathing difficulties, the events following the worker's entry into the workplace sufficed as "occurring from without" as required by RCW 56.08.100. ....Adeline Thompson, 90 4743 (1992) [dissent] [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under King County Cause No. 92-2-17307-7.]
Where the worker has shown through competent expert testimony that he developed a mental condition as a result of a sudden emotional stress during the course of employment, he has presented sufficient proof that he has suffered an industrial injury. The worker need not show that the stress was "unusual," or that it "arose out of" employment. ....Robert Hedblum, 88 2237 (1989) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Thurston County Cause No. 89-2-02751-5.]
"Sudden and tangible happening"
An event is a sudden and tangible happening of a traumatic nature when it is something of notoriety, fixed as to time and susceptible of investigation. In this decision In re Adeline Thompson, BIIA Dec., 90 4743 (1992) is designated as "significant." ....Virginia Key, 94 4700 (1996)[dissent] [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under King County Cause No. 97-2-24869-9KNT.]
A worker's mental reaction to failed job performances and related disciplinary actions over a period of time leading ultimately to dismissal do not establish the "suddenness" or "traumatic" requirements of proof of an industrial injury. ....Daniel Ramos, 91 6906 (1993) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Clark County Cause No. 93-2-01054-4]
Two hours of hand-carrying boxes and removing office belongings, resulting in the aggravation of a preexisting shoulder strain, meets the definition of an industrial injury. ....Renford Gallier, 89 3109 (1990)
Three weeks of harassment by a co-worker, producing a mental condition, constitutes an industrial injury. The emotional trauma was fixed as to time, a matter of notoriety, and susceptible to investigation. ....David Erickson, Dec'd.,65,990 (1985)
Emotional trauma at work over a period of five hours, which lights up latent, asymptomatic and non-disabling multiple sclerosis, constitutes an injury. [RCW 51.08.100]. ....Laura Cooper, 54,585 (1981)
A mile hike by a land surveyor, producing a hyperventilation syndrome and an anxiety reaction, constitutes a "sudden and tangible happening." There is no legal requirement that tangible happenings be instantaneous or confined to a period measured in a certain number of seconds or even minutes. ....James Jacobs, 48,634 (1977)
Toxic Encephalopathy
A worker presented no objective evidence of exposure to carbon monoxide or insufficient oxygen during a specific flight when she felt hungry and disoriented and after which the worker felt mentally slow, easily frustrated, and afflicted with memory problems. As a result, although the medical witness diagnosed hypoxic encephalopathy due to oxygen deprivation or toxic encephalopathy due to carbon monoxide exposure during specific flights, the Department appropriately rejected the claim for industrial injury. ....Nancy Proszek, 92 6049 (1995)) [Editor's note: Intalco Aluminum v. Department of Labor & Indus., 66 Wn.App. 644 (1992) distinguished because there the facts demonstrated multiple possible causes of neurological damage actually present in the workplace. The worker offered no objective evidence of a damaging incident or damaging exposure. The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under King County Cause No. 95-2-0188-8.]
"Traumatic nature"
A worker's aspiration of a piece of steak during a business lunch is a "sudden and tangible happening, of a traumatic nature...occurring from without," and meets the statutory definition of an injury. No showing of external physical violence is necessary for an incident to qualify as "traumatic." ....Donald Cawley, Dec'd., 41,864 (1974) [dissent]
Unusual exertion not required
The aggravation of preexisting lung blebs (weakened spots) ruptured by routine on-the-job exertion is compensable as an "injury." It is not necessary to show unusual exertion as in cases of cardiovascular incidents. ....Gary Sundberg, 62,107 (1983) [dissent]