Recent court decision: AutoZone v. Industrial Commission

The Ohio Supreme Court has finalized its decision in relation to AutoZone Stores v. Industrial Commission of Ohio.  As you may recall, the question before the Supreme Court in this case was whether the injured worker was  entitled to temporary total compensation (TT) after being terminated from his position due to a physical  altercation with his supervisor. The claimant was injured on 6/20/20 and was working light duty up until the date  of his termination, which took place on 9/5/20. In November 2020, the claimant had surgery for the allowed  conditions and requested temporary total compensation beginning the date of his surgery. It was noted that the  claimant did not secure other employment in between his date of termination from AutoZone and his surgery in  November. Because of this fact pattern, the employer appealed the payment of compensation and argued that  the injured worker was not entitled to temporary total compensation as he was not employed at the time of his  request for disability. The claimant argued that he was entitled to compensation as the surgery that led to his  current request for TT was solely related to the allowed conditions. 

The Supreme Court determined that there are two specific questions that need to be answered in this situation: 

Is the injured worker’s inability to work the direct result of the allowed conditions? – this is a question related to  the medical information of the claim file. 

Is the injured workers’ current unemployment due to reasons completely unrelated to the allowed conditions? - this is a legal question that delves into a claimant’s medical inability to work vs. simply not working and if they are  simply not working, then why?  

The Supreme Court ruled that the claimant must be employed at the time of a request for compensation. In the  AutoZone case the injured worker was not working due to termination for cause, and he did not secure  employment elsewhere in between the time of his termination and the date of his surgery. Therefore, the  Supreme Court found that he was not entitled to temporary total compensation since he was not  working/receiving wages at the time of the compensation request.  

All appeal and reconsideration options have been exhausted in this matter so this decision is now final and can be  used by employers to determine if TT is necessary and appropriate when an injured worker is no longer employed  and has not secured employment elsewhere. If you have questions related to this court case, please feel free to  reach out to your Sedgwick claims examiner and they can help you determine if the AutoZone case applies to your  

company’s claim scenario. In some instances, we may recommend that you contact your company attorney to  help determine the legal application of the AutoZone case. 

If you have any questions, contact our Sedgwick program manager, Julia Bowling at julia.bowling@sedgwick.com or phone 513-218-4062.