The Feel Good Doctrine Still Controls the Determination of Medical Treatment in Ohio Workers’ Compensation Claims
March 18, 2013Employees that are Required to Travel as Part of their Normal Work Assignments Expand Workers’ Compensation Liability Exposure
May 6, 2013On March 12, 2013, the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed a court of appeals decision ordering that the Industrial Commission reinstate an award of temporary total disability compensation to a claimant based on its finding that he did not voluntarily abandon his employment. State ex rel. Haddox v. Indus. Comm. (2013), 2013-Ohio-794, No. 2011-1622.
The Haddox case involved a request for temporary total disability compensation filed by truck driver George Haddox based on a back injury he suffered in a December 2005 traffic accident. Mr. Haddox was cited by the police for the accident. Because this was his third chargeable accident in a twelve-month period, it resulted in being dropped from his employer’s insurance coverage. Since he could no longer work as a truck driver, Mr. Haddox’s employment was terminated. The Industrial Commission ultimately denied Mr. Haddox’s request for disability compensation, finding that his termination constituted voluntary abandonment of employment because he had not been fired due to his December 2005 accident, but rather because he had become uninsurable under his employer’s auto insurance policy.
Mr. Haddox filed a mandamus action and the Tenth District Court of Appeals found that the Industrial Commission had abused its discretion in denying the request for temporary total disability compensation based on the Ohio Supreme Court’s ruling in State ex rel Gross v. Indus. Comm. (commonly referred to as Gross II). Gross II and its progeny held that when misconduct leading to termination occurs prior to or contemporaneously with a work injury, there can be no voluntary abandonment such that temporary total disability compensation is barred.
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. The Court found that because Mr. Haddox was discharged for the same misconduct that caused his industrial injury, the discharge was not tantamount to a voluntary abandonment of employment that precludes temporary total disability compensation. It is worth noting that Justice Maureen O’Connor entered a separate concurring opinion, noting that she dissented from the Gross II decision and continues to believe that it was wrongly decided. She acknowledged that the Court was duty-bound to accept the decision, but “urge[d] the General Assembly to act” to remedy the Gross II holding.
Despite Chief Justice O’Connor’s plea, the Haddox case makes it clear that it remains the rule that the voluntary abandonment doctrine does not apply where employee misconduct leading to termination occurred prior to or contemporaneous with the work injury. Employers seeking to utilize this doctrine in challenging temporary total disability compensation should be mindful of this important limitation.
