## Facts

- Joseph Gateley worked as a roofing mechanic for Construction Collaborative, Inc.
- On December 31, 1987, the workday ended early for a holiday, and employees gathered on the employer’s premises to wait for late paychecks.
- While waiting, an employee produced a Nerf football, and several employees, including a foreman, began throwing it back and forth in the roadway.
- The football was overthrown toward a parking garage; Gateley ran, jumped onto a snowbank to catch it, slipped, and injured his back.
- Gateley sought workers’ compensation benefits for temporary total incapacity, asserting the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.

## Issues

1. Whether an injury sustained while voluntarily playing catch with a Nerf football on the employer’s premises while waiting for paychecks is compensable, or excluded as resulting from “voluntary recreational activities” under G.L. c. 152, § 1(7A).
2. Whether the activity could alternatively be treated as a deviation from employment removing the injury from the course of employment.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the denial of benefits.
- The court held the injury resulted from Gateley’s voluntary participation in a recreational activity and therefore fell within the § 1(7A) exclusion.
- The court concluded the reviewing board’s decision was supported by the evidence under the applicable standard of review.
- The court did not rely on the alternative “deviation” rationale because § 1(7A) independently required denial.

## Legal Principles

- G.L. c. 152, § 1(7A) excludes from compensable “personal injuries” those resulting from an employee’s voluntary participation in recreational activities.
- An activity may be “voluntary recreational” even when it occurs on the employer’s premises, involves co-workers (including supervisors), and occurs while the employee is present for a work-related reason such as awaiting wages.
- On judicial review, the challenging party bears a heavy burden; the court asks whether the reviewing board’s decision is supported by the evidence and is not arbitrary or capricious, and it does not reweigh the facts.

## Conclusion

Because Gateley’s back injury was caused by his voluntary participation in an informal recreational game while waiting for paychecks, § 1(7A) barred workers’ compensation coverage, and the denial of benefits was affirmed.


Gateley’s Case, 415 Mass. 397, 613 N.E.2d 918 (Mass. 1993)