 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Koehler Electric v. Wills3/22/2000
le under Idaho's workers' compensation law without evidence that some hazard in the workplace contributed to the injury); Stapleton v. Industrial Comm'n, 668 N.E.2d 15, 16 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996) ("If the fall is idiopathic, resultant injuries are not compensable unless the employment significantly contributed to the injury by placing claimant in a position of greater risk of injury from falling."); Elliott v. Industrial Comm'n, 505 N.E.2d 1062, 1066-67 (Ill. App. Ct. 1987) (holding idiopathic fall on steps when leg gave out due to numbness and previous injury was not compensable: "The act of walking down the stairs itself does not establish a risk greater than those faced outside of work. . . . There was no evidence that the stairs themselves were unique to his employment and increased the danger of injury." (Emphasis added.)). Our assessment of the law from other jurisdictions finds support from Larson in his treatise on workers' compensation law, who concludes that the general rule requires that the employment must contribute to the hazard of the fall. See Workmen's Compensation Law ยง 12.14(c), at 3-373 to 3-374.
In conclusion, we hold that it is not necessary for a claimant injured in an idiopathic fall to prove that his injuries were worse because he fell from a height. It is only required that he prove that a condition of his employment increased the risk of injury . In this case, expert testimony was not essential because the fact finder could conclude based on common experience that the risk of injury is greater when one falls from a height of four to five feet onto a concrete floor than when one falls on level ground. See Howard v. Ford Motor Co., 363 S.W.2d 61, 65 (Mo. Ct. App. 1962) ("Unquestionably an idiopathic fall from an inherently dangerous height would meet the requirement of a hazard in the employment conditions."). Consequently, the lack of expert testimony in this case with respect to any enhanced injuries sustained by Wills is not fatal. We hold, therefore, that there was substantial evidence to support the commissioner's conclusion that Wills' injuries arose out of his employment with Koehler.
AFFIRMED.
|