You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Jeffrey Hicks v. State of Missouri, Department of Corrections and Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund

Citation: Not availableDocket: ED108023

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals; March 17, 2020; Missouri; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by a former corrections officer who sustained an injury during training and sought temporary total disability (TTD) benefits after being terminated for alleged misconduct. The appellant suffered a shoulder injury and underwent multiple surgeries, claiming that he was unable to perform full duties until February 10, 2016. The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denied his TTD benefits, asserting that his termination was due to misconduct related to improper reporting of absences, not the absences themselves. The court examined the statutory interpretation of 'post-injury misconduct' under Section 287.170.4, which excludes injury-related absences from being considered misconduct unless the employee is certified as capable of working with restrictions. The court found that the Commission misapplied the statute, as the appellant was not able to work with restrictions until the agreed date. Consequently, the court reversed the Commission's decision, reinstating the Administrative Law Judge's award of TTD benefits, as the termination did not preclude his entitlement to benefits. The judgment was remanded with instructions to restore the TTD benefits, emphasizing the statutory protection for injury-related absences. Judges concurred in the decision to reverse and remand the Commission's ruling.

Legal Issues Addressed

Interpretation of 'Post-Injury Misconduct' under Section 287.170.4

Application: The court held that absences due to injury do not constitute misconduct unless the employee is capable of working with restrictions, contrary to the Commission's ruling.

Reasoning: This interpretation misapplies statutory construction principles, as the statute clearly states that absence due to injury is not misconduct unless the employee is capable of working with restrictions.

Standard of Review for Workers' Compensation Cases

Application: The court applied the standard of review under Section 287.495.1, which allows modification or reversal if the Commission acted beyond its powers or if the facts do not support the award.

Reasoning: Section 287.495.1 establishes the standard of review for workers' compensation cases, permitting modification, reversal, remand, or nullification of awards only under specific conditions.

Temporary Total Disability (TTD) Benefits

Application: The court determined that the Commission erred in denying TTD benefits to the employee, as his absence was due to an injury, and he was not capable of working with restrictions until February 10, 2016.

Reasoning: Hicks filed for compensation for unpaid temporary total disability (TTD) until February 10, 2016. The employer contested this claim, asserting that Hicks was terminated for 'post-injury misconduct' under Section 287.170.4.