Occupational Disease: Occupational Disease Versus Injury

Hartford v. Montana State Fund, In re Claim of McKirdy [08/01/12] 2012 MTWCC 28 Although Respondent argues that the claimant suffered from an occupational disease, the evidence presented to the Court was that the claimant felt a “pop” while working, the claimant’s supervisor testified that he witnessed the incident, and the claimant’s treating physician opined that the claimant’s rotator cuff tear was caused by an industrial accident.  The Court concluded the claimant had an injury and not an occupational disease.

Dewey v. Montana Contractor Compensation Fund [05/16/09] 2009 MTWCC 17 If the claimant’s left wrist condition is attributable to an industrial accident in which a stack of stair risers fell onto it, then his condition is an industrial injury and not an occupational disease.

Kratovil v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. [07/17/07] 2007 MTWCC 30 Where the symptoms of Petitioner’s hand and wrist conditions predated a specific drill accident, and an x-ray report which predated the drill accident indicates readily observable degenerative changes in Petitioner’s left hand, Petitioner’s wrist and hand conditions cannot be attributed to the drill accident.
Cardwell v. UEF [06/15/07] 2007 MWCC 22 In light of the testimony regarding the physical demands of the work Petitioner performed (hanging sheetrock), the fact that Petitioner can recall no specific incident preceding his neck pain, and the uncontroverted medical evidence that Petitioner’s condition is work related, the Court concludes that Petitioner’s condition is more likely than not an occupational disease.
Mosca v. American Home Assurance [2/13/04] 2004 MTWCC 6 Where claimant's job involved hard labor and only upon retrospection did he remember events on a single day that might have caused his herniated disk, and where the evidence and medical opinions indicated his herniated disk arose on account of job activities but diverges as to whether his condition arose as a result of events on a single day or over a longer period of time, the Court finds evidence of a cumulative, multiple trauma over more than one day the more plausible explanation and finds that claimant suffered an occupational disease rather than an injury.
Mosca v. American Home Assurance [2/13/04] 2004 MTWCC 6 Where the only medical evidence was that claimant suffered an injury or occupational disease, the Court must choose between the two.