## Facts

- John E. Dodson worked for Dubose Steel, Inc. as a long-distance truck driver.
- While driving a Dubose tractor-trailer on a public road, Dodson merged into a lane occupied by Troy Campbell, a motorist with no connection to Dubose.
- Campbell honked and yelled as Dodson merged and forced Campbell out of his lane.
- At the next stoplight, Campbell yelled at Dodson about nearly being hit.
- Dodson stopped, exited his truck, approached Campbell’s vehicle, yelled at Campbell, and struck the hood of Campbell’s vehicle.
- Campbell attempted to drive away; during that attempt, Campbell’s vehicle struck Dodson, killing him.
- Dodson’s widow, Shelby J. Dodson, sought workers’ compensation death benefits.
- The North Carolina Industrial Commission awarded benefits, reasoning that the dispute began with Dodson’s driving while doing his job and that long-distance driving exposed Dodson to a greater chance of such highway confrontations.
- The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the award in a divided decision, with a dissent disagreeing with compensability.

## Issues

1. Whether Dodson’s death “arose out of” his employment when it resulted from a traffic confrontation that escalated after he left his truck and confronted another driver.
2. Whether benefits were barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act because Dodson’s death was proximately caused by his willful intention to injure or kill another person.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed the Court of Appeals.
- The court issued a per curiam opinion adopting the Court of Appeals dissent as the basis for decision.
- The case was remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the Industrial Commission for proceedings consistent with the dissent.
- In practical effect, the Supreme Court rejected the award of death benefits under the analysis set out in the dissent, which treated the fatal injury as outside compensable coverage and/or barred by the statute addressing willful intent to injure or kill.

## Legal Principles

- A workers’ compensation claimant must show the injury both occurred in the course of employment and arose out of employment; “arose out of” requires a causal connection between the work and the injury-producing event.
- An assault may be compensable when it has its origin in the employment, but compensation can be denied where the event is driven by a personal quarrel or where the employee’s conduct breaks the work-related causal connection.
- When an employee departs from work activity and initiates or escalates a confrontation for personal reasons, the resulting injury may be treated as stemming from a personal risk rather than a work-caused risk.
- North Carolina law limits compensation when the employee’s injury or death is proximately caused by the employee’s willful intention to injure or kill another; aggressive conduct can trigger this bar, depending on the fact findings required on remand.

## Conclusion

In *Dodson v. Dubose Steel, Inc.*, the North Carolina Supreme Court, through a per curiam opinion, reversed an award of workers’ compensation death benefits to a truck driver’s widow and remanded for further proceedings, adopting the Court of Appeals dissent that viewed the road-rage confrontation—after the driver exited the truck, approached the other motorist, and struck the vehicle—as a personal altercation that defeated the required work connection and could also bring the claim within the statutory bar for deaths proximately caused by the employee’s willful intention to injure or kill another.


Dodson v. Dubose Steel, Inc., 591 S.E.2d 548, 358 N.C. 129 (2004)