City of Gadsden v. Lawrence Scott

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 10/29/2010 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011 2090567 C i t y o f Gadsden v. Lawrence S c o t t Appeal from Etowah C i r c u i t (CV-06-1283) Court MOORE, J u d g e . The of C i t y o f Gadsden t h e Etowah Circuit ("the C i t y " ) a p p e a l s Court ("the t r i a l from a judgment court") worker's compensation b e n e f i t s t o Lawrence S c o t t . awarding We r e v e r s e . 2090567 Relevant Facts S c o t t was b o r n on M a r c h 25, 1950, a n d was 59 y e a r s o l d a t the as time of the t r i a l . a police officer about August training According f o r t h e C i t y i n November 1976. 21, 2001, S c o t t exercise t o S c o t t , he b e g a n w o r k i n g involving On o r p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an i n - s e r v i c e restraint maneuvers. When maneuver was p e r f o r m e d on S c o t t b y B a r r y Thomas, S c o t t ' s w r i s t made a p o p p i n g s o u n d . right S c o t t t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d j o k e d w i t h Thomas t h a t Thomas h a d b r o k e n S c o t t ' s h a n d b u t t h a t had not r e a l l y Scott t h o u g h t i t was b r o k e n , a l t h o u g h d i d not report a the i n j u r y Scott i td i d hurt. t o the C i t y at that S c o t t s t a t e d t h a t he h a d h a d some d i s c o m f o r t time. and s w e l l i n g from the i n j u r y around t h e time t h e i n c i d e n t had o c c u r r e d b u t t h a t he "got over" t h a t i n j u r y and c o n t i n u e d t o perform h i s normal work d u t i e s f o r t h e C i t y . According discomfort to Scott, i n his right he began wrist i n 2004, d o c t o r , D r . Kenny S m i t h , r e g a r d i n g w i t h h i s w r i s t around t h a t time. deposition that, based pain and a n d he v i s i t e d h i s having Dr. Smith t e s t i f i e d in his 2004. 2 some t h e p r o b l e m s he was on h i s n o t e s , about h i s r i g h t w r i s t i n A p r i l having Scott had complained Dr. Smith s t a t e d t h a t , 2090567 a t t h e A p r i l 2004 v i s i t , diagnosed Scott according with he had x - r a y e d S c o t t ' s w r i s t and arthritis. Dr. Smith stated t o h i s n o t e s f r o m June 21, 2004, S c o t t was identify an injury r i g h t w r i s t and that would account for the pain t h a t an X - r a y r e v e a l e d t h a t S c o t t had disk." Scott testified an o r t h o p e d i c he time Scott because, Smith scaphoid to Dr. Scott stated that Dr. a p p o i n t m e n t f o r him w i t h Dr. a c t u a l l y v i s i t e d Dr. stated, his a space referred Scott surgeon. S m i t h had s c h e d u l e d more t h a n one Stewart before in t h a t , a f t e r h i s w r i s t became more p a i n f u l i n June 2004, Dr. W i l l i a m Stewart, that, unable to b e t w e e n two b o n e s i n h i s w r i s t , o r a " w i d e n i n g o f t h e lunate had he Stewart f o r the "didn't want to get first cut or anything." Dr. Stewart's notes, Scott described 2001, had t o Dr. the d a t e d O c t o b e r 1, i n c i d e n t t h a t had 2004, r e v e a l occurred S t e w a r t ; t h a t S c o t t s t a t e d t o Dr. " f e l t s o m e t h i n g pop that on A u g u s t 21, Stewart that he and h u r t r e a l v i o l e n t l y on t h e dorsal aspect of h i s r i g h t w r i s t " at t h a t t i m e ; t h a t h i s w r i s t had " s w e l l e d up and b o t h e r e d h i m a p r e t t y g o o d b i t a t t h e t i m e but it seemed l i k e i t calmed " [ a ] f t e r that i t continued down a t a t o a c t up 3 later and p o i n t " ; and i t has continued that to 2090567 b o t h e r h i m now t o a w o r s e n i n g d e g r e e . " Dr. Stewart s t a t e d i n h i s O c t o b e r 1, 2004, n o t e s t h a t S c o t t h a s got a proximal injury and changes." that row c a r p a l i s no[w] beginning lunate proximal gap determined f r o m an o l d l i g a m e n t t o produce that Scott some arthritic had " r a d i a l row d i s r u p t i o n , " " w i d e n i n g on the dorsal "narrowing of the a r t i c u l a r row." "probably D r . S t e w a r t ' s n o t e s , d a t e d O c t o b e r 15, 2004, r e v e a l Dr. Stewart joint instability further view" of the of h i s r i g h t carpal scaphoid wrist, c a r t i l a g e at the proximal carpal Dr. Stewart's notes f u r t h e r s t a t e d t h a t S c o t t much s w e l l i n g on t h e u n d e r s u r f a c e developing to Stewart's notes, "does have the a trauma dated carpal of the November tunnel "has s o o f t h e w r i s t t h a t he i s a c a r p a l t u n n e l syndrome secondary and T h i s w o u l d c l e a r l y be original 1, 2004, syndrome injury." state which that is Dr. Scott probably secondary t o h i s pathology of the w r i s t . " According t o S c o t t , D r . S t e w a r t p e r f o r m e d an MRI on S c o t t and i n f o r m e d S c o t t t h a t he h a d b o n e s s e p a r a t e d Dr. Stewart performed surgery, a carpal November tunnel release," 17, 2 0 0 4 ; S c o t t or a "proximal on Scott's testified 4 that right i n hiswrist. row f u s i o n w i t h hand/wrist h i s regular on health 2090567 insurance paid f o r that surgery. According to Scott, Dr. S t e w a r t o p e r a t e d on t h e t o p and t h e b o t t o m o f h i s h a n d and p u t a " s p i d e r p l a t e " i n h i s hand. surgery, i.e.,a "radial w r i s t on M a r c h 14, 2005. Dr. Stewart performed a second styloidectomy," on Scott's right Scott a l s o t e s t i f i e d that the spider p l a t e D r . S t e w a r t h a d p l a c e d i n S c o t t ' s h a n d became l o o s e that Dr. V i c t o r i a surgery spider plate. been back t o v i s i t three Scott submitted December 13, had disability 2004. performed began on testified his claim telephoned incident him and, was to Scott The C i t y s u b m i t t e d t h a t he h a d trial. h i s f i r s t r e p o r t o f i n j u r y t o t h e C i t y on In that occurred Scott on report, Scott stated o r a b o u t A u g u s t 21, November 17, 2004, n o t i f i e d t h e C i t y on November 24, 2004. once had D r . S t e w a r t o r D r . M a s e a r i n two o r years a t the time of injury specialist, on h i s w r i s t on M a r c h 3 0 , 2006, and h a d removed t h e screws from t h a t not Masear, a hand and reported investigate to 2001, and City, that he someone circumstances s a i d , h i s statement had been the that h i s Scott t e s t i f i e d the the that of had that, had the recorded. a t r a n s c r i p t i o n of that statement at t r i a l . S c o t t began r e c e i v i n g r e t i r e m e n t b e n e f i t s b e g i n n i n g 5 A u g u s t 1, 2090567 2005. Janice Crim, the d i r e c t o r o f r i s k management f o r C i t y , t e s t i f i e d t h a t S c o t t had r e c e i v e d d i s a b i l i t y Scott testified, retirement however, because he had that he was retirement. eligible worked f o r the he missed the for regular City for over 25 years. Scott testified that because of h i s r i g h t - h a n d 16, 2004. had and not a day of w r i s t problems u n t i l S c o t t t e s t i f i e d t h a t , by o f w o r k i n November 2004, he was the work November time of h i s l a s t a F i e l d Sergeant. day According to Scott, h i s d u t i e s at that p o s i t i o n i n c l u d e d a r r i v i n g to a s h i f t e a r l y and a s s i g n i n g b e a t s and c o m p l e t i n g and overtime that his job on a d a i l y An slips f o r e v e r y b o d y on r e q u i r e d him t o use that a l l the p a y r o l l shift. h i s r i g h t hand He stated repetitively basis. office Morris, a doctor into evidence, his w r i s t ; Dr. concerned that note dated June 1, 2005, of Dr. Michael o f o s t e o p a t h i c m e d i c i n e , w h i c h was stated that Morris Scott's S c o t t had opined at sustained that time physical limitations and h i s f e l l o w o f f i c e r s i n p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r . 6 an K. submitted injury that he was could place Dr. M o r r i s to him noted 2090567 f u r t h e r that, i n h i s opinion, Scott could not "perform a l l the e s s e n t i a l j o b d u t i e s e x p e c t e d o f h i m as a p o l i c e Procedural Scott f i l e d officer." History a complaint against t h e C i t y a n d a number o f f i c t i t i o u s l y named d e f e n d a n t s on November 16, 2006, worker's compensation b e n e f i t s from t h e C i t y . an answer on December 8, 2006, affirmative defenses; s p e c i f i c a l l y , requesting The C i t y asserting a filed number the C i t y asserted, of among other t h i n g s , t h a t the a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s had run; that Scott had failed to comply with the notice requirements of the Workers' Compensation A c t ("the A c t " ) , § 25-5-1 e t s e q . , A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 ; a n d t h a t t h e C i t y was c l a i m i n g a s e t o f f p u r s u a n t t o § 2 5 - 5 - 5 7 ( c ) , A l a . Code 1975. The C i t y f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r a summary j u d g m e n t on A u g u s t 2 1 , 2 0 0 8 ; t h a t m o t i o n was d e n i e d on A p r i l A trial 1, 2009. was h e l d on November 10, 2009. 2009, t h e t r i a l court entered an o r d e r On November 17, f i n d i n g t h a t S c o t t had " s u f f e r e d a c o m p e n s a b l e i n j u r y t o a s c h e d u l e d member -- h i s right based on t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s and t h e l a c k o f n o t i c e , d e n y i n g Scott's claim hand," that overruling he the C i t y ' s i s permanently objections disabled 7 under t h e A c t , and 2090567 ordering within both parties to submit 20 d a y s o f t h e e n t r y 2009, t h e t r i a l defense that court the proposed of the o r d e r . final On judgments December 29, e n t e r e d a judgment denying the C i t y ' s statute of limitations had r u n ; denying S c o t t ' s c l a i m t h a t he has a 1 0 0 % i m p a i r m e n t t o h i s r i g h t h a n d ; denying Scott's claim that he was "temporarily d i s a b l e d " ; f i n d i n g t h a t S c o t t had s u f f e r e d a totally cumulative-stress i n j u r y t o h i s r i g h t hand t h a t had r e s u l t e d i n a 75% impairment to h i s r i g h t hand; 1 ordering that court C i t y ; f i n d i n g the C i t y r e s p o n s i b l e surgical, c o s t s be p a i d by t h e f o r a l l Scott's prescription, vocational, and other medical, expenses i n r e g a r d t o h i s i n j u r y as s e t o u t i n § 25-5-58, A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 ; ordering that Scott's attorney's fees amounting t o 15% of h i s r e c o v e r y be p a i d i n a lump-sum a m o u n t ; and o r d e r i n g t h e C i t y ' s a t t o r n e y t o p r e p a r e an amended j u d g m e n t s e t t i n g o u t t h e moneys due S c o t t and S c o t t ' s attorney. A l t h o u g h some c a s e l a w has t r e a t e d i n j u r i e s t o t h e w r i s t s as c a u s i n g a l o s s o f , o r a l o s s o f u s e o f , an arm, see C a r t e r v. S o u t h e r n A l u m i n u m C a s t i n g s , 626 So. 2d 636 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1993), i n the p r e s e n t case the t r i a l c o u r t r u l e d t h a t S c o t t ' s w r i s t i n j u r y h a d c a u s e d a 7 5 % l o s s o f u s e o f S c o t t ' s hand. S c o t t d i d n o t a p p e a l t h a t r u l i n g , so we a r e n o t a s k e d t o determine whether the t r i a l c o u r t p r o p e r l y c l a s s i f i e d the w r i s t i n j u r y as a h a n d i n j u r y . Therefore, throughout t h i s o p i n i o n , we r e f e r t o t h e w r i s t i n j u r y as a h a n d i n j u r y . 1 8 2090567 The 11, trial 2010, court entered an amended j u d g m e n t on w h i c h a w a r d e d S c o t t $28,050 i n lump-sum January disability b e n e f i t s ; a w a r d e d an a t t o r n e y ' s f e e o f $4,207.50, p a y a b l e f r o m S c o t t ' s award; a l l o w e d S c o t t ' s a t t o r n e y t o d e d u c t f r o m S c o t t ' s award the r e a s o n a b l e as p a i d . The c o s t o f c a s e p r e p a r a t i o n ; and t a x e d C i t y f i l e d a motion to a l t e r , t h e j u d g m e n t on J a n u a r y 21, 2010, regarding limitations, the statute of amend, o r costs vacate r e a s s e r t i n g i t s arguments notice, and its e n t i t l e m e n t t o a s e t o f f and a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e r e were no f a c t s recited in conclusions entered the trial therein. On court's February judgment 1, 2010, supporting the trial a s e c o n d amended j u d g m e n t t h a t i n c l u d e d f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w . the t r i a l the court f i n d i n g s of I n t h a t s e c o n d amended j u d g m e n t , c o u r t d e t e r m i n e d , among o t h e r things, that " t h e r e i s i n f a c t c l e a r and c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e t h a t as a d i r e c t and p r o x i m a t e r e s u l t and c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e work t h a t [ S c o t t ] p e r f o r m e d f o r t h e [ C i t y ] as a p o l i c e o f f i c e r , i n v o l v i n g t h e r e p e t i t i v e use o f h i s right hand, [Scott] suffered severe permanent cumulative s t r e s s r i g h t c a r p a l tunnel i n j u r i e s , with t h e l a s t d a t e [ S c o t t ] s u f f e r e d same was on November 16, 2004, t h a t c a u s e d him s u c h c o n s t a n t and severe p a i n t h a t i n f a c t he s u f f e r e d a 7 5 % l o s s o f t h e use of h i s r i g h t hand." The trial court further compensated under § determined that Scott should 2 5 - 5 - 5 7 ( a ) ( 3 ) a . 1 2 . , A l a . Code 1975, 9 be for 2090567 the Scott was e n t i t l e d t o r e g u l a r r e t i r e m e n t , and, t h u s , t h a t t h e C i t y was not total loss entitled compensation o f use to any benefits. of h i s r i g h t setoff hand, against The C i t y f i l e d that Scott's workers' a postjudgment motion on F e b r u a r y 9, 2010; t h a t m o t i o n was d e n i e d on F e b r u a r y 11, 2010. The C i t y filed i t s notice of appeal to t h i s c o u r t on M a r c h 10, 2010. Standard o f Review " S e c t i o n 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( e ) , A l a . Code 1975, p r o v i d e s the standard of review i n a workers' compensation case: "'(1) I n reviewing the standard of p r o o f s e t f o r t h h e r e i n and o t h e r l e g a l issues, r e v i e w by t h e C o u r t o f Civil A p p e a l s s h a l l be w i t h o u t a p r e s u m p t i o n o f correctness. " ' ( 2 ) I n r e v i e w i n g pure f i n d i n g s of f a c t , the f i n d i n g of the c i r c u i t court s h a l l n o t be r e v e r s e d i f t h a t f i n d i n g i s s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . ' " S u b s t a n t i a l evidence i s 'evidence of such weight and q u a l i t y t h a t f a i r - m i n d e d p e r s o n s i n t h e e x e r c i s e of i m p a r t i a l judgment can r e a s o n a b l y i n f e r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e f a c t s o u g h t t o be p r o v e d . ' West v. F o u n d e r s L i f e A s s u r a n c e Co. o f F l o r i d a , 547 So. 2d 870, 871 ( A l a . 1 9 8 9 ) . "'Our review is restricted to a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of whether the t r i a l c o u r t ' s factual findings are supported by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . A l a . Code 1975, § 10 2090567 25-5-81(e)(2). T h i s s t a t u t o r i l y mandated s c o p e o f r e v i e w does n o t p e r m i t t h i s c o u r t to r e v e r s e the t r i a l c o u r t ' s judgment based on a p a r t i c u l a r f a c t u a l f i n d i n g on the ground t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l evidence supports a contrary factual finding; rather, i t p e r m i t s t h i s c o u r t t o r e v e r s e the trial court's judgment only i f its factual f i n d i n g i s not supported by substantial evidence. See Ex parte M & D Mech. C o n t r a c t o r s , I n c . , 725 So. 2d 292 (Ala. 1 9 9 8 ) . A t r i a l c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s o f f a c t on c o n f l i c t i n g evidence are c o n c l u s i v e i f they are supported by substantial evidence. Edwards v. J e s s e S t u t t s , I n c . , 655 So. 2d 1012 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 5 ) . ' "'Landers v. Lowe's Home C t r s . , I n c . , [14] So. 3d [144, 151] ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 7 ) . ' T h i s c o u r t ' s r o l e i s not to reweigh the evidence, but to a f f i r m the judgment of the t r i a l c o u r t i f i t s f i n d i n g s are s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e and, i f s o , i f t h e correct legal conclusions a r e drawn therefrom.' B o s t r o m S e a t i n g , I n c . v. A d d e r h o l d , 852 So. 2d 784, 794 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 2 ) . " MasterBrand Cabinets, Civ. App. I n c . v. Ruggs, 10 So. 3d 13, 16-17 (Ala. 2008). Discussion The City i d e n t i f i e s s i x issues on S c o t t ' s w o r k e r ' s c o m p e n s a t i o n c l a i m was appeal: (1) whether b a r r e d by t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s ; (2) w h e t h e r S c o t t t i m e l y n o t i f i e d t h e C i t y h i s i n j u r y p u r s u a n t t o § 25-5-78, A l a . Code 1975; the C i t y i s e n t i t l e d to a s e t o f f of the workers' 11 of (3) w h e t h e r compensation 2090567 benefits due Code 1975; Scott (4) w h e t h e r cumulative-stress the trial use of the of f a c t trial injury; (5) w h e t h e r hand; that and the evidence (6) whether the trial a r e s u p p o r t e d by t h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d t o appeal, we will first cases, an address injured the [Ms. App. of s e e , e.g., 2080990, J a n . 8, 2010), compensation. case employee from the date of the a c c i d e n t , event causing the i n j u r y , Civ. of court's these i s s u e s are p o t e n t i a l l y d i s p o s i t i v e compensation Sys., supports S c o t t s u f f e r e d a 75% l o s s City's r e g a r d i n g t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s and n o t i c e . years of a court. Because entire with § 25-5-57(c)(1), A l a . the evidence supports a f i n d i n g court's finding his right findings i n accordance to file 2010] a arguments In workers' generally has two i . e . , the w o r k - r e l a t e d J a c k s o n v. D e l p h i A u t o . So. verified 3d , (Ala. complaint See § 25-5-80, A l a . Code 1975. cumulative-physical-stress of the seeking However, i n t h e injuries, the two-year s t a t u t o r y p e r i o d commences on t h e " d a t e o f t h e i n j u r y , " i d . , which has been d e f i n e d as the "date of the employee's exposure to the i n j u r i o u s job s t i m u l a t i o n . " C o r p . v. J o n e s , 678 So. 2d 181, 185 12 Dun last & Bradstreet ( A l a . C i v . App. 1995) . In 2090567 this case, the t r i a l repetitive-use c o u r t found t h a t injury S c o t t had sustained a t o h i s hand, w i t h the l a s t on-the-job i n j u r i o u s e x p o s u r e o c c u r r i n g on November 16, 2004, w h i c h bring the complaint, f i l e d statute City of l i m i t a t i o n s argues, evidence on November 16, would 2006, w i t h i n for cumulative-stress injuries. however, t h a t S c o t t d i d not p r e s e n t The sufficient t o s u p p o r t a c l a i m t h a t h i s hand i n j u r i e s resulted from c u m u l a t i v e p h y s i c a l s t r e s s . The C i t y f u r t h e r a r g u e s the injuries evidence indicated training-exercise November 16, In that the incident occurring resulted in 2001, from the making the 2006, c o m p l a i n t u n t i m e l y by o v e r t h r e e y e a r s . trauma, an employee must present clear c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e o f l e g a l and m e d i c a l c a u s a t i o n . v. Safeco App. that o r d e r t o p r o v e t h a t an i n j u r y a r o s e f r o m w o r k - r e l a t e d cumulative Inc. the Brown, I n s . Co. 2002); and 897 So. 2d 332, v. B l a c k m o n , § 334 851 25-5-81(c), So. ( A l a . C i v . App. 2d 532, A l a . Code 537 1975. Valtex, 2004); (Ala. Civ. "Clear convincing" evidence i s " e v i d e n c e t h a t , when w e i g h t e d a g a i n s t e v i d e n c e i n o p p o s i t i o n , w i l l produce i n the mind of the t r i e r of f a c t a f i r m c o n v i c t i o n as t o e a c h e s s e n t i a l e l e m e n t of t h e c l a i m and a h i g h p r o b a b i l i t y as t o t h e c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h e c o n c l u s i o n . P r o o f by c l e a r and convincing evidence requires a level of proof 13 and and 2090567 g r e a t e r than a preponderance of the evidence or the s u b s t a n t i a l weight of the evidence, but l e s s than beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt." § 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( c ) , A l a . Code 1975. "To e s t a b l i s h l e g a l c a u s a t i o n , t h e e m p l o y e e must p r o v e t h a t 'the p e r f o r m a n c e o f h i s o r h e r d u t i e s as an e m p l o y e e e x p o s e d him o r h e r t o a d a n g e r o r r i s k m a t e r i a l l y i n excess of t h a t to which people are n o r m a l l y e x p o s e d i n t h e i r e v e r y d a y l i v e s . ' Ex p a r t e T r i n i t y I n d u s . , I n c . , 680 So. 2d 262, 267 ( A l a . 1 9 9 6 ) . To e s t a b l i s h m e d i c a l c a u s a t i o n , t h e e m p l o y e e must p r o v e t h a t t h e d a n g e r o r r i s k t o w h i c h t h e e m p l o y e e was e x p o s e d '"was i n f a c t [a] c o n t r i b u t i n g cause of the i n j u r y " ' f o r which b e n e f i t s are sought. I d . a t 269 ( q u o t i n g C i t y o f T u s c a l o o s a v. Howard, 55 A l a . App. 701, 318 So. 2d 729, 732 ( C i v . 1 9 7 5 ) ) . " Madix, I n c . v. Champion, 927 2005). an So. 2d 833, On a p p e a l , when an e m p l o y e r employee has proven a 837 ( A l a . C i v . App. challenges a finding work-related cumulative-trauma i n j u r y , t h i s c o u r t r e v i e w s the r e c o r d t o determine whether trial that the c o u r t , b a s e d on i t s w e i g h i n g o f t h e c o m p e t i n g e v i d e n c e , r e a s o n a b l y c o u l d have b e e n c l e a r l y convinced that cumulative trauma and injury. So. 3d i n the employment legally Ex p a r t e M c I n i s h , , [Ms. medically caused 1060600, S e p t . 5, the 2008] ( A l a . 2008) . A f t e r t h o r o u g h l y r e v i e w i n g t h e r e c o r d , we f i n d t h a t S c o t t presented i n s u f f i c i e n t evidence to support a claim that his h a n d i n j u r i e s r e s u l t e d f r o m c u m u l a t i v e t r a u m a on t h e j o b . 14 To 2090567 find legal been causation, clearly duties lunate convinced performed incurring the t r i a l by the hand injury and from Scott injuries c o u r t w o u l d have h a d t o have the evidence exposed he carpal tunnel that Scott to sustained, the a office danger of i . e . , a scaphoid syndrome, w h i c h was greater t h a n t h e r i s k o f s u c h i n j u r i e s e x p e r i e n c e d by p e r s o n s i n t h e i r everyday l i v e s . S c o t t t e s t i f i e d t h a t h i s d u t i e s as a s e r g e a n t i n t h e C i t y o f Gadsden P o l i c e a shift early all of the p a y r o l l shift. his i n c l u d e d coming i n t o a l l o f t h e a s s i g n m e n t s and and o v e r t i m e s l i p s preparing f o r everybody on hand r e p e t i t i v e l y contains on a d a i l y basis. no e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g that However, S c o t t , by h a n d i n t h e f r e q u e n c y and manner i n w h i c h he working, increased for w h i c h he the trial sought court his likelihood compensation. would have h a d of a c q u i r i n g the To find legal to surmise that causation, Scott's of mere conjecture, causation cannot or surmise. So. 2d 467, 469 be based Wal-Mart ( A l a . C i v . App. 15 on Stores, 1999). using injuries However, a legal the d i d while d u t i e s l e g a l l y caused h i s hand i n j u r i e s . 737 that He f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t h i s j o b r e q u i r e d h i m t o u s e right record his and m a k i n g Department job finding speculation, I n c . v. Chamless, 2090567 Perhaps causation, recognizing Scott tunnel syndrome injury. The the that, argues should lack as be legislature of a matter treated does evidence as a of of legal law, carpal cumulative-trauma characterize carpal tunnel syndrome as a f o r m o f c u m u l a t i v e - p h y s i c a l - s t r e s s d i s o r d e r t h a t can r e s u l t f r o m o n - t h e - j o b e x p o s u r e . No. 437, 92-537, § 1. 441-43 See 1992 A l a . A c t s , A c t However, i n Ex p a r t e USX C o r p . , 881 So. 2d ( A l a . 2 0 0 3 ) , o u r supreme c o u r t n o t e d t h a t carpal t u n n e l syndrome c a n a l s o r e s u l t f r o m a o n e - t i m e a c c i d e n t . M i l l r y M i l l Co. v. M a n u e l , App. 2008) one-time ("Carpal t u n n e l a c u t e trauma abstract syndrome may or accident."). held that the p a r t i c u l a r any 999 So. 2d 508, 512 n.3 tunnel syndrome a l s o be c a u s e d by a Our supreme c o u r t carpal tunnel as an a c c i d e n t a l p e r s o n a l cumulative-physical-stress disorder. So. 2d a t 441-43. (Ala. Civ. has f a c t u a l evidence i n the record, not law, d i c t a t e s whether s h o u l d be c l a s s i f i e d See syndrome injury Ex p a r t e USX C o r p . , or a 881 Hence, t h e l e g i s l a t i v e r e f e r e n c e t o c a r p a l as a type of cumulative-physical-stress d i s o r d e r d i d not r e l i e v e S c o t t , i n t h i s case, of the burden of proving legal causation. 16 2090567 B e c a u s e we f i n d no e v i d e n c e o f l e g a l no n e e d t o d i s c u s s m e d i c a l say that Scott scaphoid causation at length. presented lunate causation, no evidence trial working i n d i c a t i n g that h i s i n j u r y r e s u l t e d from cumulative work-related tunnel that syndrome. Scott exercise Scott's caused or contributed i n j u r e d h i s scaphoid that carpal tunnel. to explain injury We also need finding that Scott 28 to h i s carpal lunate i n t h e 2001 t r a i n i n g caused the c o n s t r i c t i o n of Scott presented how not delve timely no m e d i c a l h i s job duties, contributed to the carpal tunnel accident. while As t h e C i t y a r g u e s , t h e e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e s and t h a t evidence convinced court that the o f f i c e duties Scott performed f o r the C i t y find Suffice i t to t r a u m a a n d t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e c o u l d n o t have c l e a r l y the we i n fact, also syndrome. into filed or other any p o s s i b l e a claim based ground f o r on t h e 2001 See A m e r i c a n C y a n a m i d v. S h e p h e r d , 668 So. 2d 26, ( A l a . C i v . App. 1995) ( h o l d i n g t h a t s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s b e g i n s t o r u n i n l a t e n t i n j u r y c a s e s when t h e " ' c l a i m a n t , a reasonable and 2B person, should recognize the nature, seriousness, compensable c h a r a c t e r o f h i s i n j u r y o r d i s e a s e ' " A. L a r s o n , The Law o f Workmen's C o m p e n s a t i o n 17 as (quoting § 78.41(a) 2090567 (1989))). notify The the evidence i s undisputed C i t y o f h i s 2001 accident. The last accident sentence of § that Scott w i t h i n 90 did not days of that 25-5-78, A l a . Code 1975, provides: ny other provision of this s a t i o n s h a l l be p a y a b l e u n l e s s g i v e n w i t h i n 90 d a y s a f t e r t h e accident or, i f death r e s u l t s , The l a n g u a g e u s e d i n t h a t s e n t e n c e i s m a n d a t o r y , and, failure to provide notice within 90 days thus, a extinguishes a l l c l a i m s f o r c o m p e n s a t i o n , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e r e a s o n g i v e n by the i n j u r e d worker f o r the f a i l u r e to p r o v i d e See Wal-Mart S t o r e s , I n c . v. C i v . App. I t i s undisputed the City 1994). n o t i c e of occurrence. the Hence, Elliott, 2001 Scott could s t a t u t e of i n awarding reverse the Scott judgment partial-disability any 2d 906, 909 not w i t h i n 90 maintain (Ala. provide days of i t s claim for a c c i d e n t , even i f the c l a i m was any limitations. B a s e d on t h e f o r e g o i n g , we erred So. t h a t S c o t t d i d not accident c o m p e n s a t i o n b a s e d on t h e 2001 n o t b a r r e d by t h e 650 timely notice. conclude t h a t the t r i a l compensation. i n s o f a r as b e n e f i t s , and 18 i t awards we court Accordingly, Scott remand t h e we permanent- case for the 2090567 trial court opinion. to enter a new judgment c o n s i s t e n t with this 2 REVERSED AND REMANDED. Pittman, B r y a n , a n d Thomas, J J . , c o n c u r . Thompson, P . J . , c o n c u r s i n t h e r e s u l t , w i t h o u t B a s e d on o u r d i s p o s i t i o n , we p r e t e r m i t r e m a i n i n g i s s u e s r a i s e d by t h e C i t y . 2 the 19 writing. any d i s c u s s i o n o f

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.