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
