Stufflebean v. Crete Carrier Corp.
| Decision Date | 24 January 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 895 S.W.2d 115 |
| Parties | David STUFFLEBEAN, Respondent, v. CRETE CARRIER CORPORATION, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Brian J. Fowler, Kansas City, for appellant.
Michael A. Knepper, Kansas City, for respondent.
Before FENNER, C.J., and KENNEDY and BERREY, JJ.
Appellant, Crete Carrier Corporation, appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) awarding temporary workers' compensation benefits to respondent, David Stufflebean.
Stufflebean was employed by Crete Carrier Corporation as an over-the-road truck driver. On May 17, 1991, he sustained a back injury while loading a flat trailer tire onto a holder in order to return it to his employer. This injury occurred in Norfolk, Nebraska. It is undisputed that the injury arose out of and in the course of Stufflebean's employment with Crete. After the accident, Stufflebean notified Crete of the accident and timely filed a claim with the Missouri Division of Workers' Compensation. 1 In March 1994, the administrative law judge dismissed the claim on the basis that the Missouri Division of Workers' Compensation did not have jurisdiction. Stufflebean subsequently filed a petition for review with the Commission. The Commission concluded that Missouri had jurisdiction based upon a finding that Stufflebean's employment contract had been entered into in Missouri and because his employment was principally localized in Missouri. The Commission reversed the ALJ's dismissal order and issued a temporary award for compensation. On appeal, Crete contends that the Commission erred in finding that the Missouri Division of Workers' Compensation had jurisdiction over Stufflebean's claim.
Stufflebean claims that this court has no jurisdiction to review the Commission's action because the award issued by the Commission was not final.
This court has no appellate jurisdiction in workers' compensation cases except as expressly conferred by statute. Hillenburg v. Lester E. Cox Medical Ctr., 879 S.W.2d 652, 655 (Mo.App.1994). Section 287.495 authorizes an appeal from the final award of the Commission. Id. "An order lacks finality where it remains tentative, provisional, contingent, subject to recall, revision or reconsideration by the issuing agency." Id. "A final award is one which disposes of the entire controversy between the parties." Lewis v. Container Port Group, 872 S.W.2d 134, 136 (Mo.App.1994). "No appeal lies from a temporary or partial award." Hillenburg, 879 S.W.2d at 655. However, appellate review on the issue of liability in a workers' compensation case is permissible although an award is denominated "temporary or partial." Woodburn v. May Distributing Co., 815 S.W.2d 477, 481 (Mo.App.1991); Smith v. Fabricated Metal Prods., 883 S.W.2d 537, 538 (Mo.App.1994). The question presented in the case at bar is one of liability. Therefore, review of the Commission's decision is appropriate by way of appeal.
On appellate review of a workers' compensation award, the evidence and all reasonable inferences from the evidence are viewed in the light most favorable to the finding and award of compensation. Lieneke v. Evangelical Deaconess Hosp., 418 S.W.2d 142 (Mo. banc 1967). Evidence which might support a different finding is to be disregarded. Rector v. City of Springfield, 820 S.W.2d 639, 640 (Mo.App.1991). Furthermore, where a question of jurisdiction is in doubt, it should be determined in favor of the Commission. Ringeisen v. Insulation Servs., Inc., 539 S.W.2d 621, 626 (Mo.App.1976).
Appellant argues that the jurisdictional requirements of section 287.110(2), RSMo 1986 2 were not established under the record. As relevant herein, section 287.110(2) provides that the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law applies as follows:
(1) When an injury is received within the state of Missouri;
(2) To all injuries regardless of where received, if the contract of employment was entered into in the state of Missouri, unless the contract of employment provides otherwise; and
(3) To all injuries received outside Missouri where the employee's employment was principally localized in Missouri.
In the case at bar, there is no dispute but that respondent's injury was received in the state of Nebraska. However, the Commission found that the employment contract was entered into in Missouri and further that respondent's employment was principally localized in Missouri.
In a workers' compensation proceeding, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hampton v. Big Boy Steel Erection
...Co., 895 S.W.2d 155 (Mo.App.1995); Searcy v. McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Co., 894 S.W.2d 173 (Mo.App.1995); Stufflebean v. Crete Carrier Corp., 895 S.W.2d 115 (Mo. App.1995); Eimer v. Board of Police Com'rs of Kansas City Mo., 895 S.W.2d 117 (Mo.App.1995); Dawson v. Home Interiors & Gifts, I......
-
Rupard v. Kiesendahl
...entire controversy between the parties. Id. Generally, no appeal lies from a temporary or partial award. Stufflebean v. Crete Carrier Corp., 895 S.W.2d 115, 116 (Mo.App. W.D.1995) (citation omitted). An exception exists when the employer contends that it is not liable for the payment of com......
-
Leslie v. School Services and Leasing, Inc.
...partial award of benefits. Generally, a temporary or partial workers' compensation award is not appealable. Stufflebean v. Crete Carrier Corp., 895 S.W.2d 115, 116 (Mo.App.1995). However, appellate review of such an award is permissible when the question presented is one of liability. Id. B......
-
Braswell v. Missouri State Highway Patrol
...Woodburn v. May Distrib. Co., 815 S.W.2d 477, 480 (Mo.App. S.D. 1991); Hillenburg, 879 S.W.2d at 656; Stufflebean v. Crete Carrier Corp., 895 S.W.2d 115, 116 (Mo.App. W.D. 1995). Thus, it has been stated, "a court can review the issues on which liability turns, such as notice or whether an ......