Court: Court of Appeals of Washington; February 3, 1994; Washington; State Appellate Court
Thompson, C.J., reversed the superior court's judgment that overturned the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals' denial of workers' compensation for Patrick Witherspoon. The jury found that Witherspoon contracted spinal meningitis from a co-worker at IBP during his employment. Witherspoon began working at IBP in late 1986 and developed flu-like symptoms in January 1987, leading to a hospitalization for spinal meningitis. His initial claim for workers' compensation was denied in February 1987, and after an unsuccessful appeal to the Board, Witherspoon pursued a trial de novo in superior court in June 1992.
During the trial, Witherspoon testified about his work environment and a specific incident where a co-worker coughed in his face. Medical testimony suggested that the bacteria causing meningitis could enter the body through the mouth or nose, and Dr. Cole, Witherspoon's physician, indicated that the co-worker was likely the source of infection. However, he acknowledged the presence of asymptomatic carriers. The Department's witnesses argued that the cold conditions in the meat plant would inhibit bacterial survival and that significant exposure typically requires prolonged contact, which was not established. The hearing officer concluded that Witherspoon's condition did not arise naturally from his employment, deeming the exposure coincidental.
Despite the jury's finding that Witherspoon's condition arose from his employment, IBP's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied. The legal definition of occupational disease, according to RCW 51.08.140, encompasses diseases that arise naturally and proximately out of employment.
In Dennis v. Department of Labor, Indus., the Washington Supreme Court established that a worker must demonstrate that their occupational disease arose naturally from distinctive conditions inherent to their specific employment. Such conditions do not need to be unique to the worker's job, but they must be more likely to have caused the disease than general conditions encountered in daily life or other jobs. The court emphasized that the focus should be on employment-related conditions, not incidental ones present in the workplace. In the case of Mr. Witherspoon, the court found that his meningitis did not result from distinctive employment conditions at IBP, as the transmission of meningitis occurs through airborne droplets and was not linked to Mr. Witherspoon's work environment. His exposure was deemed coincidental rather than a consequence of his employment. Consequently, the trial court's denial of IBP's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was reversed, and judgment was entered in favor of IBP. The court did not address IBP's other claims since the ruling resolved the case.
