Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District Case Summaries: December 15, 2011 [Missouri Lawyers Media]

Civil Practice

Primary Jurisdiction DoctrineWorkers' Compensation Exclusivity Where a plaintiff, who was injured in a workplace slip and fall accident, brought a negligence action against his employer, and the trial court entered summary judgment for the employer on the grounds that the plaintiff's exclusive remedy was in workers' compensation where his claim was pending with the employer challenging whether a surgery was related to the workplace accident, the issue of whether there was an "accidental injury" and whether the surgery was related were clearly disputed questions of fact which the trial court did not have the authority to decide because they are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission, so the matter is reversed and remanded with directions to enter a stay of proceedings.

Exclusivity defense "In this case, however, the exclusivity defense does not involve a question of law to be determined by the circuit court. Rather, the exclusivity defense is based on the existence of accidental injury, which is an issue of fact for the Commission, not the circuit court, to decide.In this situation, it would be inappropriate for a court to enter summary judgment on the exclusivity defense before the Commission decides the question of accidental injury because summary judgment would bar the refiling of the lawsuit if the Commission does not find an accidental injury."

Narrowing definitions Concurring opinion by Romines, J.: "I agree completely with the analysis and result reached by Judge Crane. I write only to note that this is the inevitable result of the narrowing of the definition of 'accidental injury' by the Legislature. The required result of such 'narrowing' can be seen in the manner in which we recently applied this Legislative dictate in Johme v. St. John's Mercy Healthcare, ED96467 (Mo.App. E.D. 2011). "Clearly the Legislature prefers jury trials."Judgment is reversed and remanded.Cooper v. Chrysler Group, LLC (MLW No. 63073/Case No. ED96549 - 11 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Crane, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, McShane, J. (Eric D. Holland, Steven J. Stolze and R. Seth Crompton for appellant) (Maureen A. McGlynn for respondent).

Driver's License DWIProbable Cause Where a driver, arrested at an alcohol checkpoint, did not contest evidence that he smelled faintly of alcohol, had glassy eyes and failed some field tests, and the trial court found the officer's testimony credible, the evidence was sufficient to support probable cause, and the trial court erred in excluding the breath test and maintenance records, so the judgment is reversed and remanded for reinstatement of the administrative suspension.Judgment is reversed and remanded.Sostman v. Director (MLW No. 63076/Case No. ED95557 - 7 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Gaertner Jr., J.) Appealed from circuit court, Franklin County, Williams, J. (Jonathan H. Hale for appellant) (Steven P. Kuenzel for respondent).

Insurance Employee Exclusion 'Temporary Worker'Third-Party Involvement Where plaintiffs sought to equitably garnish an insurer for a wrongful death judgment obtained after decedent was killed working with a truck insured under a farm owner's business automobile liability policy, and a third party furnished the decedent to the farm owner for employment, the decedent was the farm owner's "temporary employee," and the policy's definition of temporary employee was ambiguous because it did not specify what kinds of third-party actions qualify as "furnishing" an employee, so the appellate court would hold that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the insurer, but the case is transferred to the Missouri Supreme Court based on its general interest and importance.Transferred.Mendenhall v. Property and Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford (MLW No. 63072/Case No. ED96681 - 9 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Gaertner Jr., J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, McShane, J. (Mark E. Goodman and Amy L. Fehr for appellant) (John L. Hayob for respondent).

ProbateSexual Offender StatusEvidenceRelevancy Where a man found to be a sexually violent predator challenged the exclusion of evidence of his immigration status and possible deportation order, the trial court did not abuse its discretion because the evidence was not relevant to the issue to be decided.Judgment is affirmed. In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Javier Calleja (MLW No. 63075/Case No. ED96158 - 5 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Crane, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, Whittington, J. (Erika R. Eliason for appellant) (Chris Koster and Timothy A. Blackwell for respondent).

Workers' Compensation SIF Liability PTDHepatitis CWhere a worker was found to be permanently and totally disabled as the result of hepatitis C, which he contracted on the job, the doctors' testimony and medical reports were competent evidence that the disability was caused by the occupational disease alone, and deferring to the commission's assessment of witness credibility, the worker's claim against the Second Injury Fund was properly denied. Judgment is affirmed. Pursley v. Christian Hospital Northeast/Northwest (MLW No. 63074/Case No. ED96496 - 11 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Cohen, J.) Appealed from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Stephen C. Banton for appellant) (Carol L. Barnard for respondent).