Seitz v. L & R INDUSTRIES, INC., ETC.
1981 R.I. LEXIS 1413, 437 A.2d 1345 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For a purely psychological injury caused by mental stimulus, without accompanying physical trauma, to be compensable under workers' compensation, the employee must demonstrate the injury resulted from a dramatically stressful stimulus beyond the intensity of ordinary, everyday employment stresses.
Facts:
- Beulah Seitz had worked for approximately six years as a secretary to the vice president and general manager of Worcester Pressed Aluminum Corporation in Worcester, Massachusetts.
- In 1975, L & R Industries, Inc. (employer) purchased the Palco Products Division and ordered its relocation from Worcester, Massachusetts, to Smithfield, Rhode Island.
- Beulah Seitz and Francis Maguire, a former vice president, actively supervised and implemented the physical moving operation, which was completed in a thirty-six-hour period.
- Upon beginning operation in Smithfield, conditions at the new location were confusing and abnormal, with unavailable records, inadequate telephone service, unvacated premises, and untrained personnel.
- Beulah Seitz, while attempting to perform office manager and secretary duties, was also required to do janitorial and cleaning work and protect office equipment from a leaking roof.
- Beulah Seitz experienced difficulties in interpersonal relations, feeling her authority as office manager was not recognized and office protocol was unsatisfactory.
- She attempted to arrange a meeting with Mr. Maguire and other key personnel to resolve these difficulties, but the meeting was scheduled for October 3, 1975, and then canceled due to another employee's intervention.
- As a direct result of the canceled meeting, Beulah Seitz became so upset that she terminated her employment on the afternoon of October 3, 1975, and had not returned to work since.
- Dr. Elliot R. Reiner, a psychiatrist who had treated Beulah Seitz for depressive neurosis in 1967, diagnosed her condition in October 1975 as an "obsessive compulsive personality disorder," stating her long-standing rigid personality was aggravated by her employment from September 15, 1975, to October 3, 1975, without any physical trauma.
Procedural Posture:
- Beulah Seitz (employee) filed a claim for workers' compensation for total disability resulting from a personal injury of a psychological nature.
- A trial commissioner heard the case and issued a decree ordering compensation for total disability to Beulah Seitz.
- The appellate commission, with one dissenting member, sustained the trial commissioner's decree, ordering compensation for total disability.
- L & R Industries, Inc. (employer) appealed the final decree of the appellate commission to the Supreme Court of Rhode Island.
- The case was initially argued before four members of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island on March 4, 1981, resulting in a per curiam opinion affirming the appellate commission's decree by an equally divided court (Seitz v. L & R Industries, Inc., R.I., 428 A.2d 788 (1981)).
- A petition for reargument was subsequently granted, and the case was reargued before a five-member court on October 5, 1981.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a psychological injury resulting solely from ordinary, day-to-day job stresses, without physical trauma or an unusually dramatic stressful stimulus, qualify as a compensable "personal injury arising out of and in the course of employment" under Rhode Island's Workers' Compensation Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Weisberger, Justice
No, a psychological injury resulting solely from ordinary, day-to-day job stresses, without physical trauma or an unusually dramatic stressful stimulus, does not qualify as a compensable "personal injury" under the Rhode Island Workers' Compensation Act. The court reverses the appellate commission's award of compensation, holding that the circumstances found by the commission did not appropriately give rise to a "personal injury." The court notes three types of psychic injury: (1) physical injury caused by mental stimulus (generally compensable), (2) psychic injury caused by physical trauma (almost universally compensable), and (3) mental injury produced by mental stimulus, without physical causes or results ("mental-mental"). While acknowledging a distinct majority position supporting compensability for "mental-mental" cases in other jurisdictions, the court emphasizes that many such awards involve dramatic psychological trauma. The court expresses reluctance to allow compensation for "neurotic reaction to the ordinary everyday stresses that are found in most areas of employment" due to concerns about the burden on commerce and industry, the potential for creating "voluntary 'retirement' programs," and the difficulty of screening such claims given the limitations of psychiatric science and the adversary judicial process. The court concluded that Beulah Seitz's stressful period, though "scarcely tranquil," did not "exceed the intensity of stimuli encountered by thousands of other employees and management personnel every day," and thus a "more dramatically stressful stimulus must be established" for a psychic injury to be compensable under the Rhode Island statute, especially since the decisional context at the time the term "personal injury" was adopted did not include such interpretations.
Dissenting - Kelleher, Justice
Yes, a psychological injury resulting from job-related stress, if it causes an incapacity for work, should be considered a compensable "personal injury" under the Rhode Island Workers' Compensation Act, regardless of whether the stimulus was "dramatically stressful." Justice Kelleher argues that the majority's rejection overlooks the humanitarian purposes of workers' compensation legislation, which aims to impose the burden of job-related casualties on the employer to prevent employees from becoming public charges. He points out that Rhode Island's compensation statute removed the requirement of "accidental injury" in 1949 and does not distinguish between physical and mental injuries, focusing instead on "incapacity for work." The dissent contends that the majority's imposition of a "more dramatically stressful stimulus" standard constitutes "judicial legislation" and an unwarranted intrusion into the fact-finding role of the commission. Justice Kelleher dismisses fears of "opening the floodgates" to malingering, asserting that the legal system and the commission's competence are sufficient to detect fraudulent claims, just as they handle other intangible injuries like heart attacks or back strains without requiring "unusual or excessive stress." He also criticizes the majority's "disturbing distrust of those who practice within the science of psychiatry," noting the court's prior recognition of advancements in the field.
Analysis:
This case significantly narrows the scope of compensable psychological injuries under workers' compensation in Rhode Island by requiring a "dramatically stressful stimulus" for "mental-mental" claims, moving the state towards a more restrictive interpretation than many other jurisdictions. The decision reflects a judicial concern regarding the potential for overburdening the compensation system and the perceived difficulty of objectively assessing purely psychological claims based on ordinary work stress. It sets a high bar for employees seeking compensation for conditions like burnout or chronic stress-induced disorders, emphasizing an event-based causation rather than a cumulative one. This ruling highlights the ongoing legal tension between a broad, humanitarian interpretation of workers' compensation statutes and practical administrative concerns about system integrity and employer liability, likely influencing future legislative debates or appellate challenges concerning mental injury claims.
