## Facts

- Thelma Davis worked for Shoreham Convalescent Center as a nurse’s aide for about four to five months.
- On December 18, 1974, after completing her normal day’s work, Davis was preparing to go home.
- While putting on her outer coat, she placed her right arm in the coat and reached behind her back to place her left arm into the sleeve.
- At that moment, she felt a “pop” in her back.
- Davis reported the incident to her supervisor, but she had no immediate pain, discomfort, or physical limitation.
- Davis testified that before the December 18 incident she had never experienced back pain, limitation, or back trouble and had been able to perform her job duties without difficulty.
- Several weeks later, Davis experienced a second back episode while lifting a patient, but that later episode was not part of the claim litigated in this case.
- Davis ultimately underwent two back surgeries and became unable to perform her job duties.
- Davis sought workers’ compensation benefits from Shoreham and its insurer, Houston General Insurance Company.
- An administrative law judge found the incident occurred “in the course of” employment but concluded it did not “arise out of” employment and denied benefits.
- The Georgia Board of Workmen’s Compensation and the trial court affirmed, and Davis appealed to the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

## Issues

1. Whether Davis’s back injury, sustained when she felt a “pop” while putting on her coat after her shift on the employer’s premises, “arose out of” her employment under Georgia workers’ compensation law.
2. Whether the evidence supported the Board’s finding that the injury lacked the required causal connection to a risk incident to the employment.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the denial of workers’ compensation benefits.
- The court agreed that the incident occurred “in the course of” employment, but held the record permitted the Board to find it did not “arise out of” employment.
- The court treated the causative act—reaching to put on a coat to leave work—as an ordinary personal movement, not a danger incident to the employment relationship.
- Applying the deferential standard of review used for Board findings, the court left the denial of compensation in place.

## Legal Principles

- To be compensable, an injury must both occur “in the course of” employment and “arise out of” employment; the two requirements are separate, and both must be met.
- “Arising out of” requires a causal connection between the conditions of work and the injury; the causative danger must be incident to the character of the employment and not independent of the employer-employee relationship.
- An injury caused by a routine personal act or neutral movement, without a work-related risk connected to the job’s conditions or duties, may fail the “arising out of” requirement even if it happens at the workplace.
- On appeal, if there is evidence that authorizes the Board’s finding on compensability, an appellate court will not reweigh the facts and will affirm.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of benefits because, although Davis’s back “pop” occurred at the end of her workday on the employer’s premises and therefore was in the course of employment, the Board was authorized to find that the injury did not arise out of employment since it resulted from a common personal movement (putting on a coat) rather than a risk connected to her work as a nurse’s aide.


Davis v. Houston General Insurance Co., 233 S.E.2d 479 (1977)