Death claim

Home » Blog » death claim

Amazon Driver Killed by Dogs: Injured Workers in the News #67

Posted on October 28, 2022 by Edward Singer

An Amazon Delivery Driver was tragically found dead. Two dogs are suspected to have attacked the Driver. A news reports has a quote from an authority that “[d]ue to the fact of the nature of some of the injuries to the male driver, we can’t confirm or deny if (the dogs) were the cause of the death of the driver, however we wanted to be safe,” … said. It was noted that “[a] preliminary investigation indicates that animal bites played a role in the Amazon worker’s death, but a medical examiner will make the final determination.” nypost.com

This article will discuss how the workers death will be analyzed as far as an industrial injury.

How Will The Death Causation Be Analyzed for Workers’ Compensation Purposes?

In California, the death need not be solely related to a work incident. The California Supreme Court in South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd., 61 Cal. 4th 291, noted that “ contributing proximate cause within the meaning of Kimbol has been applied more broadly in the workers’ compensation context than in tort law. HN7 Death attributable to both industrial and nonindustrial causes may support a death claim, and industrial causation has been shown in an array of scenarios where a work injury contributes to a subsequent nonindustrial injury. An employee is entitled to compensation if a new or aggravated [15] injury results from medical or surgical treatment for an industrial injury.”

Who Will Determine Whether The Death Was Industrial?

In California, an Injured Worker is entitled to have a medical evaluation to prove up their claim of industrial medical causation. In a death case, it can be an examiner who will review the medical records and coroner reports to address. Usually, there is no need for them to examine the body. This can be in the form of a Panel Doctor from the State of California who is a Qualified Medical Evaluator. Otherwise, it can be a neutral doctor agreed upon; an Agreed Medical Examiner.

In accordance with South Coast Framing, the doctor will address the cause of death and whether the dog bites contributed to the death. If the bites excited the worker and he had a heart attack and died, the bites would be found as a contributory cause of injury.

What if I Need Advice?

If you would like a free consultation regarding workers’ compensation, please contact the Law Offices of Edward J. Singer, a Professional Law Corporation. We have been helping people in Central and Southern California deal with their workers’ compensation cases for 27 years. Contact us today for more information.

WAS WORKER TRAGICALLY COOKED A WORK-RELATED EVENT? INJURED WORKER IN THE NEWS, #63

Posted on September 29, 2022 by Edward Singer

A horrible incident happened at a Food Processing Company. A Processing Worker was found dead inside a kettle cooker. The police investigation found nothing suspicious. An ongoing investigation with OSHA is continuing. The Deceased Worker leaves behind a wife and two daughters. dailymail.co

This article will discuss as to whether, given the facts, this injury would be considered work-related for the purposes of workers’ compensation benefits. If found work-related, the Deceased’s spouse and daughters may be eligible for benefits. Further, he would be entitled to burial expenses. From the facts, however, it is unclear as to how he ended up on the kettle. Based upon the current investigations there is no explanation.

If There Was No Explanation As To How The Injured Worker Died, Would It Be Considered An Industrial Death?

In California, there is the doctrine of mysterious death. In the event of a mysterious death, the accident will be considered as work-related. As a result, the Deceased Dependents could claim benefits. As per case law, it is noted in County of Contra Costa County vs. WCAB 67 C.C.C. 1614, (writ denied), “In addition to the medical evidence supporting a finding of injury on its own, the facts of this case are those of an unexplained death, in that it is not known what decedent was doing while working when the injury which caused his death occurred. Defendant is in agreement with applicant’s position that it is unknown what decedent was doing at the time the aortal dissection occurred. The situation is similar to the facts in Clemmens v. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. (1968) 261 Cal. App. 2d 1 [68 Cal. Rptr. 804] [33 Cal. Comp. Cases 186], wherein it was determined that in a case where an employee is found dead in the course of his employment in the absence of any evidence of what… caused the death, the employee is entitled to “a presumption or inference that the death arose out of the employment, since it is undisputed that this employment brought him to the place where his occurred.” Clemmens, supra 33 Cal. Comp. Cases at page 189. In the instant case, the death was caused by a dissection of the aorta, which occurred while applicant was at work. Accordingly, this creates a presumption or inference that decedent’s death [**8] arose out of his employment.”

In the existing facts, it is likely that this claim would be found as work-related.

What if I Need Advice?

DID HOSPITAL WORKER’S GROIN INJURY RESULT IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEATH CLAIM? INJURED WORKER IN THE NEWS, #52

Posted on August 8, 2022 by Edward Singer

A Hospital Worker tragically died. Law enforcement considers the death to be a homicide. The alleged cause for the homicide was a kick in the groin. Do the facts give rise to legitimate workers’ compensation work-related death claim?

It is reported as follows: a Hospital Worker had an altercation with a patient. A mental health evaluation patient was trying to leave the hospital when the staff tried to prevent her from leaving. The incident got physical. The patient began to “swing her arms and pull away from security when (an employee) attempted to grab her arms. The Mental Health Unit eventually had to step in.” The patient allegedly started to kick and then struck a Hospital Worker with her knee in the groin. The Hospital Worker, after the injury, was in the ICU for three days. Tragically, he died. katv.com

The article reporting on the matter indicated that “[a]uthorities say after a review of medical records and investigation, the cause of death is physiological stress associated with a physical altercation in the setting of cardiomegaly and obesity.” katv.com

The coroner commented that “[t]here’s a lot of people walking around with the same medical conditions he had, that might live for another 15-20 or 25 years, had it not been for the kick to the groin.” katv.com

This article will discuss the hurdles required to prove a death claim in this matter. This article will discuss issues of causation and medical legal reporting.

Is The Coroner’s Opinion Enough to Prove the Death Is Work-Related?

The answer is “no.” In California, Workers’ Compensation Law has standards of causation. The doctors must express their opinion within the workers’ compensation framework. With respect to a death claim, the medical evaluator should express their opinion within reasonable medical probability. Further, with respect to a death case, the issue is whether the industrial injury was a “contributing” cause. The South Coast Framing case established the “contributing cause” standard for death cases. (South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2015) 61 Cal.4th 291 [188 Cal.Rptr.3d 46, 349 P.3d 141].) As we don’t know whether the Coroner’s opinion was within reasonable medical probability or whether it addressed causation as a contributing cause, on it’s face, it could not be used as evidence.

Thus, a medical opinion must have the correct language. It should also be noted that criminal law has a different burden of proof. Therefore, clarification is needed within a workers’ compensation framework. It is possible that what might not be considered criminal causation can still be valid for the purposes of industrial causation.

What Medical Evidence Is Needed To Proof the Death Was Work-Related?

In this matter, either the treating physician or a medical evaluator, QME or AME, should be employed to render an opinion on industrial causation of the death. The question would be whether the attack “contributed” to the injured worker’s death. The worker’s involvement, i.e. physical activities, in the altercation can be viewed as a whole as opposed to the mere kick. In other words, the stress, mental or physical, from the incident can be considered with respect to industrial causation for the death. As noted, workers’ compensation should look at the totality of the incident and not the mere kick to the groin to make the assessment.

What if I Need Advice?

IWITN #45: A Tragic Shooting Death & Injury Of Subway Employees

Posted on July 1, 2022 by Edward Singer

It is reported that one Subway Sandwich Artist was tragically murdered and that another was shot at an Atlanta Subway Sandwich Store. A customer, upset over too much mayo being placed upon a sandwich, reportedly became violent and fired shots. The tragedy is made worse as the son of the deceased worker was present. Dailymail.com

The focus of this post will be with respect to the child who was present and their rights. This will discuss the matter in light of California Law.

Can The Child File a Workers’ Compensation Claim?

Yes. If the child’s mother was a worker and passed, it is likely that a dependency death claim can be pursued. This would be based upon the child’s age and whether their mother provided support.

Are There Any Other Benefits That The Child Could Obtain?

Yes. In the State of California, there is a Victim’s Crime Board (CalVCB) that can provide assistance. In order to qualify, a person “must be a victim of a qualifying crime involving physical injury, the threat of physical injury or death to qualify for compensation. For certain crimes, emotional injury alone is all that needs to be sustained. Certain family members or other loved ones may also qualify.” There are certain criteria that must be met as well.

One benefit that can be provided is mental health services. CalVCB can provide assistance in getting “An eligible victim may receive up to three mental health counseling sessions. Providers are required to complete a treatment plan and submit it to CalVCB before the client’s fourth session to obtain additional sessions.

There may be other benefits available. The Victim’s Crime Board website has the information.

What If I Need Advice?

THE WORST WORK INJURY EVER? INJURED WORKER IN THE NEWS, #20

Posted on March 9, 2022 by Edward Singer

A Contract Worker was killed at a landfill in Florida in perhaps the most horrible way possible.

While he was using a Porta Potty, a bulldozer ran the portable bathroom and killed his co-worker.

The Bulldozer Operator and the Deceased Employee worked for the same company. It is reported that the driver ‘… immediately exited the bulldozer and ran towards the porta potty to see if anyone was inside of it,’ the sheriff’s office spokesperson said. ‘At that time, he observed Henderson unresponsive inside the porta potty.’ dailymail.com

This tragic fact pattern will be discussed within California Law. This fact pattern contains many issues as to whether a worker can sustain a work injury while using the facilities. Further, is it possible for someone to be “at fault” and pursue a claim.

If A Worker Is On A Restroom Break, Are They Protected Under Workers’ Compensation?

California Workers’ Compensation Law provides for the “personal comfort doctrine.” The “personal comfort doctrine” provides generally that compensation extends to injuries suffered while the employee is engaged briefly and during work hours in a personal act which is necessary or helpful to his comfort or convenience. (2 Hanna, op. cit., supra, § 9.03[2][a], pp. 9–3—9–31.) The personal comfort doctrine is not strictly limited to injuries suffered on the employer’s premises. ( Cf. State Comp. Ins. Fund v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd. (Cardoza) (1967) 67 Cal. 2d 925 [32 Cal. Comp. Cases 525, 64 Cal. Rptr. 323, 434 P.2d 619] Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Workers Comp. Appeals Bd. (1977) 69 Cal. App. 3d 170 [42 Cal. Comp. Cases 297, 137 Cal. Rptr. 847].) [**8] Its limit is reached when the acts “are found to be departures effecting a temporary abandonment of employment. …” ( Id., at p. 928.) Olson Farms, Inc. v. Workers Compensation Appeals Bd. of California & Suzanne Shawnego, 51 Cal. Comp. Cases 107 (Cal. App. 3d Dist. March 05, 1986)

Thus, the Contract Worker would be covered when he used the restroom since he was engaged in a personal act which was for his comfort. His family would be able to pursue a Death Benefit Dependency Claim.

What About The Bulldozer Operator Who Cause the Accident, Does He Have A Claim?

With this fact pattern and given the “no fault” nature of workers’ compensation, the Bulldozer Operator, if he sustained an emotional injury as a result of killing his co-worker, could file a claim. It would appear that the incident may have psychiatrically traumatizing,

What If I Need Advice?