Case Title: Johnson v. State ex rel. Wyoming Worker's Compensation Div

Citation: 

Docket Number: 90-47

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1990-10-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
Johnson v. State ex rel. Wyoming Worker's Compensation Div1990 WY 100798 P.2d 323Case Number: 90-47Decided: 10/01/1990Supreme Court of Wyoming
DONALD F. JOHNSON, 

APPELLANT 
(EMPLOYEE-CLAIMANT),

v. 

THE STATE OF WYOMING, EX 
REL. WYOMING WORKER'S COMPENSATION DIVISION, 

APPELLEE 
(OBJECTOR-DEFENDANT).

Appeal from the District 
Court of Albany County, Arthur T. Hanscum, J.

Michael 
Schilling (argued), Laramie, for appellant.

Joseph B. Meyer, 
Atty. Gen., and Larry M. Donovan, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen. (argued), for 
appellee.

Before 
CARDINE, C.J.*, and THOMAS, URBIGKIT, MACY and GOLDEN, 
JJ.

* Chief Justice at time of 
oral argument.

CARDINE, Justice.

[¶1]      Appellant Donald 
Johnson sought worker's compensation benefits for depression and stress suffered 
following a truck accident that occurred in the course of employment. Following 
an administrative hearing, his injuries were deemed compensable. On appeal, the 
district court reversed the award.

[¶2]      We reverse the 
district court and remand this action for entry of an order affirming the 
administrative determination.

[¶3]      Johnson frames 
the issue as:

"Whether the type of 
mental injury sustained by employee Donald F. Johnson, that is post-traumatic 
stress disorder and spontaneous major depression, which arose immediately out of 
a motor vehicle accident which occurred in the course of employment is 
compensable under Wyoming Worker's Compensation law where there is no 
accompanying physical injury."

[¶4]      Johnson had been 
an over-the-road truck driver for over 29 years. On February 26, 1989, he was in 
the employ of Yellow Freight System driving a truck under icy road conditions on 
Interstate 80 near Laramie, Wyoming. As he rounded a curve, the wind hit the 
truck and spun it around 180 degrees. The truck came close to colliding with 
another vehicle but missed. The highway patrol stated the road should have been 
closed at the time the accident occurred. Less than three months earlier, 
Johnson had been in a similar accident, also on Interstate 80. In that accident, 
Johnson had bruised his back but did not seek medical treatment.

[¶5]      Johnson suffered 
no physical injuries as a result of the February accident. However, soon after 
the accident, he started having nightmares, had trouble sleeping and felt 
depressed. He saw a psychiatrist for his problems in March 1989. The 
psychiatrist determined that Johnson was suffering from depression and 
post-traumatic stress disorder. The psychiatrist was unable to find any other 
circumstances in Johnson's life such as the condition of his marriage and family 
life that would cause the stress and depression. He concluded that Johnson's 
symptoms were a result of the accident. Johnson received treatment and 
medication until May 16, 1989, when he was released to return to his 
job.

[¶6]      Johnson filed a 
claim for benefits in March 1989. The state Worker's Compensation Division 
objected to Johnson's claim, alleging what had happened to Johnson's did not 
fall under the definition of an injury under W.S. 27-14-102(a). An 
administrative hearing, pursuant to W.S. 27-14-602, was conducted in August of 
1989. The evidence at the hearing consisted of testimony from Johnson and the 
deposition of Johnson's psychiatrist. The hearing examiner found that Johnson 
met his burden of proof in showing a compensable injury suffered in the scope of 
his employment and that he was entitled to benefits. He was awarded temporary 
total disability benefits for February 26, 1989 through May 16, 
1989.

[¶7]      The State 
appealed the matter to the district court, pursuant to W.S. 16-3-114 and 
W.R.A.P. 12. The district court concluded that the award was not supported by 
the evidence and reversed the administrative determination.

[¶8]      When reviewing an 
administrative worker's compensation determination, we apply the following 
standard:

"We examine the entire 
record to determine if there is substantial evidence to support an agency's 
findings. If the agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, we 
cannot properly substitute our judgment for that of the agency, and must uphold 
the findings on appeal. Substantial evidence is relevant evidence which a 
reasonable mind might accept in support of the conclusions of the agency. It is 
more than a scintilla of evidence." Hohnholt v. Basin Electric Power Co-op, 784 P.2d 233, 234 (Wyo. 1989) (quoting Trout v. Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation 
Comm'n, 721 P.2d 1047, 1050 (Wyo. 1986)).

Furthermore, we 
accord no special deference to the district court's determination and review the 
matter as though the appeal came directly to this court. Wyoming Ins. Dept. v. 
Avemco Ins. Co., 726 P.2d 507 (Wyo. 1986).

[¶9]      "Injury" as 
defined in W.S. 27-14-102(a)(xi) includes mental or psychic injuries. Hohnholt, 
784 P.2d  at 235; Baker v. Wendy's of Montana, Inc., 687 P.2d 885 (Wyo. 1984); 
Consolidated Freightways v. Drake, 678 P.2d 874 (Wyo. 1984). Compensable psychic 
injuries fall into one of three categories:

"(1) a mental stimulus 
which causes a physical injury;

"(2) a physical trauma 
which causes a nervous injury; and

"(3) a mental stimulus 
which causes a nervous injury." Baker, 687 P.2d  at 891. See 1B A. Larson, Law of 
Workmen's Compensation § 42.20 (1987).

For category (3) 
injuries compensation is allowable only when the injury results from a situation 
or condition arising out of or in the course of employment that is of greater 
magnitude than the day-to-day stresses and tensions all employees usually 
experience. Hohnholt, supra; Baker, supra; Graves v. Utah Power & Light Co., 
713 P.2d 187 (Wyo. 1986). To show that the injury arises out of or in the course 
of employment, the claimant must show a causal connection between the injury and 
the employment. This causal connection exists when there is a nexus between the 
injury and some condition, activity, environment or requirement of the 
employment. Baker, supra. The claimant has the burden to establish these and 
other essential elements of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. W.S. 
27-14-603; Hohnholt, supra.

[¶10]   In Hohnholt and Graves, this court 
affirmed the denial of claims for mental injuries because the claimants failed 
to meet their evidentiary burdens needed to prove a compensable injury. In 
Graves, the claimant failed to establish unusual workplace stress as a cause for 
her injuries. 713 P.2d  at 194. In Hohnholt, the evidence established the 
claimant had a history of mental problems, and, thus, the claimant's mental 
injuries did not arise out of the course employment. 784 P.2d  at 235. In Baker, 
however, we held that emotional distress caused by sexual harassment from the 
claimant's work supervisor was compensable because it arose out of the course of 
employment and resulted from unusual workplace stress, i.e., the supervisor's 
harassment. 687 P.2d  at 891.

[¶11]   The record in this case contains 
none of the evidentiary deficiencies found in Hohnholt or Graves. The record 
indicates that Johnson demonstrated he suffered a compensable injury. Johnson's 
psychiatrist testified that Johnson's depression and stress resulted from the 
accident. He ruled out any other cause. This evidence is undisputed in the 
record. The causal connection requirement is satisfied since the accident from 
which the injury resulted occurred while the workman was driving a Yellow 
Freight truck which was an activity and requirement of his employment. The 
accident also satisfies the requirement that the mental injury resulted from a 
situation or condition that is of greater magnitude than the day-to-day stresses 
and tensions all employees usually experience. While it may be normal for and 
expected of over-the-road truck drivers to encounter hazardous, wintery driving 
conditions on Wyoming highways, involvement in an accident when driving in those 
conditions or any weather conditions falls beyond any day-to-day stress and 
tensions. It was the accident and not the driving in hazardous conditions that 
caused Johnson's injuries. Johnson is entitled to worker's compensation benefits 
as determined at the administrative hearing.

[¶12]   The order of the district court is 
reversed. This case is remanded to the district court for an order affirming the 
administrative determination.