Can You Solve the Case?
A workers’ compensation case involving an Amazon driver who was involved in two road rage incidents in the space of several minutes exposes the truth about fighting on the job, and when the resulting injuries might be compensable.
In Part I of this article, learn what happened in this case. See if you can spot the major clues that drove the outcome. In Part II, find out how the court decided and see if you identified the clues and guessed the ending.
Part I
The facts: incident #1
The claimant was delivering packages in Aurora, Illinois, when a black SUV turned sharply in front of his truck. The SUV, he later reported, almost hit a woman who was about to cross the street. He gestured and yelled, he said, to alert the other driver that he was driving dangerously. The SUV driver got out of his vehicle and was coming toward him in an aggressive manner.
The claimant felt vulnerable because he was buckled in and his driver’s door was open. That’s why, he later told the Workers’ Compensation Commission, he exited the truck and approached the man. Almost immediately, the SUV driver punched him. The claimant got back into his vehicle, yelled something at the driver, and went on to his next stop.
The claimant’s dash cam footage was largely consistent with the claimant’s description of the incident. It showed that his arms were by his side and that he was not rushing toward the other driver and was not in a fighting stance. He appeared to be saying something as the other driver approached. It also showed that neither the SUV nor the pedestrian was blocking the claimant’s truck when the other driver was walking toward him.
The facts: incident #2
The claimant continued on to his next delivery. At the customer’s front door, someone attacked him from behind. Then a few others, including the SUV driver, appeared, and beat him. They left him with a broken nose, a broken tooth, and recurring nightmares. He walked back toward his vehicle, his face bloodied, and collapsed by the passenger door.
The workers’ compensation claim
The Commission denied the claim, finding that it didn’t arise out of the claimant’s employment. It viewed him as the aggressor in the first incident because he could have driven away instead of getting out of the truck.
The Commission found the injuries resulting from the second incident were also not compensable, because the second incident would not have occurred if the claimant hadn’t triggered the first incident.
The legal rules at play
Fights arising out of disputes concerning an employee’s work are employment-related risks, and resulting injuries are compensable. That’s not the case, however, if the claimant was the aggressor.
Looking to better understand workers’ compensation defenses in your state? Look to Simply Research.
Can you solve the case?
Did the driver have a compensable claim because the video footage didn’t establish that he was saying or doing anything that would have justified the SUV driver punching him?
Or was it the case that he could have simply driven away before the SUV driver first punched him, and avoided both incidents?
Try to crack the case and then check back tomorrow to see if you came to the correct conclusion.
