Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2316 September Term, 2010

_______________________________________ WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY v.

JAN WILLIAMS

Eyler, Deborah S., Meredith, Woodward, JJ.

Opinion by Meredith, J.

Filed: April 26, 2012

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority ("WMATA"), appellant, appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court for Prince George's County which affirmed the ruling of the Workers' Compensation Commission that an injury to the right leg of Jan Williams,

appellee, was causally related to the prior injury to his left leg, and therefore covered by workers' compensation benefits. WMATA presents one question for review: Whether Claimant's March 23, 2009[,] right knee injury, incurred when he was hit by a car while returning from lunch on a day when he was attending therapy, is causally related to the work accident of April 15, 2008, where Plaintiff injured his back and left knee? We will answer that question in the negative, and reverse the decision of the circuit court. We will remand the case to the circuit court with instructions that the circuit court remand the case to the Commission for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Facts and Procedural History Mr. Williams's position as a mechanic for WMATA is very physically demanding. On April 15, 2008, while he was employed as a mechanic for WMATA, Mr. Williams injured his back and left knee on the job. Mr. Williams underwent physical therapy to treat the injury to his left knee. Prior to Mr. Williams regaining his full strength, when the physical therapy progress had started to plateau, it was recommended that Mr. Williams undergo work hardening, which is a more intensive form of physical therapy. CAM Physical Therapy provided the work hardening program at a location that is not a WMATA facility. On the second to last day of the work hardening program, March 23, 2009, Mr. Williams walked to his truck during his lunch break and ate his lunch. After he

finished eating, Mr. Williams walked through the parking lot, intending to return for another session of the work hardening program. While Mr. Williams was walking back from lunch, the driver of a car on the parking lot put her car into reverse and backed into Mr. Williams, knocking him to the ground. This resulted in an injury to Mr. Williams's right knee for which Mr. Williams claimed workers' compensation benefits. The Workers' Compensation Commission found "that the disability of the claimant's right leg/knee is causally related to the aforesaid accidental injury," and awarded benefits. WMATA filed a petition for judicial review, and requested a trial de novo in the circuit court. At the conclusion of a bench trial, the circuit court made the following factual findings: The facts are very simple in this matter. The claimant injured his back and left knee in a work-related accident on April 15th , 2008. He was going through his rehabilitation, through [h]is doctor, through [h]is therapist. It was recommended to do a work hardening program, which he was complet[ing]. He was I believe 19 or 20 classes into it, at which time on March the 23rd , 2009 the Claimant, Mr. Williams, in this matter, sustained an injury to his right knee when a car backed up and hit him. Certainly, he was not working at this time. He was, the best term of course to use is he was rehabilitating at this point in time. The circuit court affirmed the decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission, and found that Mr. Williams's injury to his right knee was compensable. WMATA appealed to this Court.

2

DISCUSSION

I. STANDARD OF REVIEW Under Maryland Code (1991, 2008 Repl. Vol.), Labor and Employment Article ("LE"),

Download WMATA v. Williams.pdf

Maryland Law