SC court reverses ruling in worker’s occupational asthma case

Listen to this article

SUMMARY

• SC Court of Appeals reversed denial of worker’s occupational disease claim
• Plaintiff alleged occupational asthma from chemical exposure at Conbraco Industries
• Court found medical evidence supported asthma diagnosis over comorbidities
• Case remanded for proper application of occupational disease test

The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed an appellate panel of the Workers’ Compensation Commission after finding its denial of a worker’s claim for a disabling occupational disease was unsupported by substantial evidence.

The 10-page opinion is Freshley v. Conbraco Industries Inc.

The plaintiff alleged he developed occupational asthma from chemical exposure at his workplace. The appellate panel denied the claim, reasoning that the plaintiff’s physicians lacked sufficient knowledge of his work environment and that none had excluded his comorbidities as contributing causes of his breathing difficulties.

The Court disagreed. It noted the medical record showed the physicians had considered the plaintiff’s job description, the length of his employment, and at least some of the chemicals to which he was exposed. The Court stressed that doctors are expected to weigh whether a patient’s account of workplace conditions is reliable and medically significant.

The panel also erred in concluding that none of the doctors had excluded comorbidities as a cause. The Court observed that the plaintiff’s treating physicians performed tests to identify the source of his symptoms and determined his shortness of breath stemmed from occupational asthma, not from his other health conditions. One doctor specifically ruled out cardiac issues as a cause.

Because the panel’s findings did not comport with the record, the Court held they lacked the support of reliable, substantial evidence. It reversed the order and remanded the case for the appellate panel to apply the proper test in deciding whether the plaintiff met his burden of proving an occupational disease.

EXTERNAL LINKS

• South Carolina Judicial Branch opinions
• Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration