Former Red Lake High School teacher wins workers' compensation ...

After almost four years, former Red Lake High School math teacher Missy Dodds has won a court case for workers' compensation for mental trauma causing mental injury.

[Travis Roste]

Another person on the public dole forever. People can't wait to file for disability, workman's comp, anything so they don't have to work, and get a gov't check forever. enough is enough.

[girlygirl]

Yep, she saw it as her personal payday. Get a job already.

[A Bad Precedent]

Another example of a judge 'legislating from the bench', and not following the clear intent of the Lockwood law, which bans claims involving PTSD. So what did the judge need to do? Since the law was clear, he needed to somehow morph the claimant's PSTD and emotional problems into physical symptoms so he could get around the law. That allowed him to make this ruling and 'precedent'. Judges like this love to make 'precedents'. This claimant was clearly claiming PSTD injury, and that is disallowed under the Lockwood decision. For the judge to claim this person's alleged PSTD turned into a 'brain and neck/shoulder' PHYSICAL injury is a stretch at best. A physical brain injury, to most people, is getting your head bashed in by a pipe, for example. The end result of this bad 'precedent' is that now the floodgates will be opened for all people claiming PTSD and emotional damage to now sue for similar nebulous 'physical' injuries which will cause more claims to be paid at taxpayer and business expense. In summary, a judge refuses to follow a precedent and the law, and simply rewrites the law the way he sees fit to allow the claim. Very bad indeed.

[hdog]

Travis Roste wrote:

Another person on the public dole forever. People can't wait to file for disability, workman's comp, anything so they don't have to work, and get a gov't check forever. enough is enough.

I have to agree....this gal went through something no one should have to, but this is a precedent we don't need....if you suffer, someone has to pay you for it. Red Lake isn't exactly Edina; she may have considered what she was getting into...the area up there is rife with violence. Even if we make an exception for her, this opens the door for lesser claims for the same reason. I can tell you from my own professional practice experience that stress disorders can involve subjective findings that are treated as clinical objective findings. In other words, though I doubt if this is the case with this woman, people with stress disorders might find themselves feeling a lot better getting paid to sit at home and watch Oprah.

If witnessing violence, even being threatened by it, constitutes a compensible disability, this country is going to head south a lot faster than we thought.

[hdog]

A Bad Precedent wrote:

Another example of a judge 'legislating from the bench', and not following the clear intent of the Lockwood law, which bans claims involving PTSD. So what did the judge need to do? Since the law was clear, he needed to somehow morph the claimant's PSTD and emotional problems into physical symptoms so he could get around the law. That allowed him to make this ruling and 'precedent'. Judges like this love to make 'precedents'. This claimant was clearly claiming PSTD injury, and that is disallowed under the Lockwood decision. For the judge to claim this person's alleged PSTD turned into a 'brain and neck/shoulder' PHYSICAL injury is a stretch at best. A physical brain injury, to most people, is getting your head bashed in by a pipe, for example. The end result of this bad 'precedent' is that now the floodgates will be opened for all people claiming PTSD and emotional damage to now sue for similar nebulous 'physical' injuries which will cause more claims to be paid at taxpayer and business expense. In summary, a judge refuses to follow a precedent and the law, and simply rewrites the law the way he sees fit to allow the claim. Very bad indeed.

A better response...and too true.

[attn_required]

So why didn't they sue the maniacs parents? He is the one that caused such 'mental damage' to the teacher! W T H

[Centinel]

A Bad Precedent wrote:

Another example of a judge 'legislating from the bench', and not following the clear intent of the Lockwood law, which bans claims involving PTSD....

Yes, its a shame. Perhaps the appellate courts can rectify, but in minnesota one need'nt get their hopes up.

For the judge who ignores the will of the people expressed through their legislature, there are always legal fictions--rhetorical frauds--available to get the desired result. For these judges, its all about the result, not the law.

[Joe]

The article states that Lockwood was a 'decision' not a law. If it is a law, then that would clearly state the intent of the people. If it is a decision, that means that another court had set the precedent because the law was unclear on how the Lockwood situation should have been resolved.

Courts don't have to follow what other courts have ruled. Even the supreme court can change its opinion on interpretation of laws over time.