On January 8, the Hawaii Supreme Court issued an amended published opinion in Skahan v. Stutts Construction Co., Inc., relating to workers’ compensation.

On November 30, 2004, Skahan injured his back while working for Stutts, and Stutts accepted workers’ compensation liability for the injury.  On June 12, 2012, after Skahan’s employment with Stutts had ended, Skahan experienced mid and low back pain while wading in the ocean.  Skahan had previously injured his lower back in 1994.  Skahan filed claims for additional workers’ compensation benefits.

At issue was whether Skahan’s low back injury was causally related to the 2004 work injury and thus a compensable claim. 

Under Hawaii law, there is a presumption that a claim is for a covered work injury, and it is the employer’s burden to introduce substantial evidence to rebut the presumption.  In this case, the employer’s expert opined that the low back injury was not caused by or related to the 2004 work injury.  However, the expert did not explain how he reached this conclusion.

The Court stated that “‘generalized’ testimony that there was no connection between an injury and work without further explanation does not rebut the presumption of coverage.”  In response to the argument that the low back injury was caused by the 1994 injury as opposed to the 2004 work injury, the Court noted that “the primary focus of the medical testimony should have been a discussion on whether the employment effort, whether great or little, in any way aggravated [the employee’s condition.]” The employer’s expert did not discuss whether Skahan’s employment aggravated his 1994 injury.  As such, the Court held that the employer did not meet its burden of production to show that Skahan’s low back injury was not causally related to the 2004 work injury.