May 2018 Update - Legislative, Regulatory, Judicial

OFFICE: 636-519-1834

FAX: 636-519-0682



MAY 2018


There was no significant legislation affecting Missouri workers’ compensation that was passed during the spring legislative session.


The mileage reimbursement rate from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 is $50.5 per mile.


The rates from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 are $923.01 for TTD and PTD and $483.48 for PPD. 


Jackson County v. Earnest (MLW No. 71433/Case No. WD81083) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District).

  • PTD Benefits
  • Activity Level

Where an employer challenged an award of permanent total disability benefits arguing that a case, which stood for the general legal proposition that an injured employee does not have to be completely inactive to be totally disabled, was overruled, the judgment is affirmed because the case was overruled on another narrow point, and the award was supported by competent and substantial evidence. 

Judgement is affirmed.   

Elsworth v. Wayne County (MLW No. 71606/Case No. SD34919 – 7 pages) Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District).

  • Safety Violation
  • Penalty

Where an employer argued that an employee’s safety rule violations entitled it to an award reduction, the employer did not show that the employee had relevant safety training, and the judgment is affirmed because the employer failed to meet its burden of persuasion.

Judgment is affirmed.

Leech v. Phoenix Home Care, Inc. (MLW No. 71576/Case No. SD35220 – 4 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District).

  • Temporary Benefits Award
  • Review

Where an employer challenged an award of temporary total disability to claimant, no statutory authority allows the appellate court to review temporary or partial benefits, so the appeal is dismissed. 

Appeal is dismissed. 

McComb v. Norfus (MLW No. 71447/Case No. SC96042 – 17 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District).

  • Co-Worker Liability
  • Non-Delegable Duty
  • Separate Duty

Where the family of a hospital courier, who died while driving his employer’s delivery vehicle to deliver non-emergency supplies during an ice storm, sued the decedent’s supervisors, who declined to pull him from his route when the weather worsened, the judgment for the defendants is affirmed because the plaintiffs failed to show that the supervisors owed the decedent a duty separate and distinct from the employer’s non-delegable duty to provide a safe workplace. 

Judgment is affirmed.

Wilkins v. Piramal Glass, USA, Inc. (MLW No. 71443/Case No. ED105683 – 12 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District).

  • Compensable Injury
  • Staph Infection
  • Medical Bills

(1)Where an employee tore his calf muscle arising from an “awkward squatting position” while replacing a part on a machine at work, the evidence showed that the claimant was injured because he was at work performing his required activities, and sufficient evidence supported a findings that treatment for a staph infection flowed from this compensable injury and was required for treatment of the compensable injury.

(2)Where an employer argued that the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission erred in admitting a claimant’s medical bills and billing index as hearsay, the evidence was properly admitted as certified business records.

Judgment is affirmed.

Thompson v. Treasurer MLW No. 71425/Case No. ED105352 – 6 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Page J.).

  • SIF Liability
  • Compensable Injury
  • “Arose Out Of”

Where the Second Injury Fund challenged an award to an employee who injured her back when she fell in her employer’s breakroom arguing that the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission was not supported by substantial and competent evidence, the judgement is affirmed because the Commission made explicit, detailed credibility and factual determinations, which must be deferred to, and substantial competent evidence supported the finding that the injury arose out of the employment.

Judgment is affirmed.

Office Location


Every effort has been made to ensure this website is accurate. However, this website is not intended as legal advice or counsel. Every situation is different and has unique circumstances. Please consult with an attorney about your specific situation. Use of this website, including email, does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. The choice of an attorney is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.