2015•University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository (University of Missouri)Open access

Causation Confusion: Missouri's Adoption of a Contributing Factor Standard for Workers' Compensation Retaliation Claims

Suzanne L. Specker

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

As this Note argues, the exclusive cause standard frustrated the statute’s purpose and effectively sanctioned employer discrimination and retaliation against employees who filed workers’ compensation claims. In Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc., the Supreme Court of Missouri corrected this mistake by adopting the “contributing factor” causation standard in lieu of the exclusive cause standard.10 In Part II, this Note analyzes the facts and holding of Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc. Next, in Part III, this Note explores the legal background of Missouri’s workers’ compensation laws, the historical context and policy considerations behind the development of Section 287.780, and the judicial interpretations of Section 287.780’s causation element. Part IV examines the court’s rationale in Templemire. Lastly, Part V assesses the validity of employer concerns about the implications that may arise from the standard’s adoption; provides guidance for employers grappling with how to respond proactively; and considers the pending legislation that, if passed, would overrule Templemire. This Note concludes by discussing what Missouri’s adoption of the contributing factor standard represents for Missouri employment discrimination law going forward.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

As this Note argues, the exclusive cause standard frustrated the statute’s purpose and effectively sanctioned employer discrimination and retaliation against employees who filed workers’ compensation claims. In Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc., the Supreme Court of Missouri corrected this mistake by adopting the “contributing factor” causation standard in lieu of the exclusive cause standard.10 In Part II, this Note analyzes the facts and holding of Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc. Next, in Part III, this Note explores the legal background of Missouri’s workers’ compensation laws, the historical context and policy considerations behind the development of Section 287.780, and the judicial interpretations of Section 287.780’s causation element. Part IV examines the court’s rationale in Templemire. Lastly, Part V assesses the validity of employer concerns about the implications that may arise from the standard’s adoption; provides guidance for employers grappling with how to respond proactively; and considers the pending legislation that, if passed, would overrule Templemire. This Note concludes by discussing what Missouri’s adoption of the contributing factor standard represents for Missouri employment discrimination law going forward.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

As this Note argues, the exclusive cause standard frustrated the statute’s purpose and effectively sanctioned employer discrimination and retaliation against employees who filed workers’ compensation claims. In Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc., the Supreme Court of Missouri corrected this mistake by adopting the “contributing factor” causation standard in lieu of the exclusive cause standard.10 In Part II, this Note analyzes the facts and holding of Templemire v. W&M Welding, Inc. Next, in Part III, this Note explores the legal background of Missouri’s workers’ compensation laws, the historical context and policy considerations behind the development of Section 287.780, and the judicial interpretations of Section 287.780’s causation element. Part IV examines the court’s rationale in Templemire. Lastly, Part V assesses the validity of employer concerns about the implications that may arise from the standard’s adoption; provides guidance for employers grappling with how to respond proactively; and considers the pending legislation that, if passed, would overrule Templemire. This Note concludes by discussing what Missouri’s adoption of the contributing factor standard represents for Missouri employment discrimination law going forward.

Key concepts: Plaintiff, Statute, Causation, Workers' compensation, Law, Legislation, Employment discrimination, Statute of limitations

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Causation Confusion: Missouri's Adoption of a Contributing Factor Standard for Workers' Compensation Retaliation Claims — Research Paper | ScholarLens