An automotive supervisor’s irritable bowel disorder is covered by workers compensation because it stemmed from his workplace puncture wound, an appellate court held Tuesday.

In Farrish of Fairfax and VADA Group Self-Insurance Association v. Faszcza, the Virginia Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a Virginia Workers Compensation Commission granting workers compensation benefits to a worker for his foot injury, infection and subsequent acquired digestive disorders.

Mark Faszcza worked as a service manager for auto dealer Farrish of Fairfax, which had workers compensation through the VADA Group Self-Insurance Association.

On Aug. 30, 2016, after leaving work and returning home, Mr. Faszcza realized he had suffered a significant puncture wound in his foot. Because of his diabetic neuropathy, he did not have sensation in his feet and was unaware of the injury until he removed his shoes and saw blood and the spike from an automotive fastener sticking up in his shoe. His wife transported him to the emergency room, where he was treated.

He filed a workers compensation claim, contending that the only place he could have encountered the fastener would have been in the service bays he frequented for work, which he also said were routinely littered with fasteners at the end of busy days.

A few days after his first treatment, Mr. Faszcza’s injury became infected and by January 2017 he had developed a Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection that required prolonged antibiotic use. He then began developing severe gastrointestinal issues, including an inflammatory bowel disease his physician attributed to the antibiotic use. The physician testified there was a “close temporal association” between the antibiotic treatment for the infected foot and his IBD.

The Virginia Workers Compensation Commission concluded that Mr. Faszcza’s IBD was causally related to the accident and therefore compensable; the employer and insurance pool appealed.

Farrish of Fairfax argued that the commission erred in finding that Mr. Faszcza had experienced a compensable injury because he failed to provide a “reasonably definite time” that the injury occurred. The appellate court, however, dismissed this argument, finding that asking the worker to provide a precise time that he sustained the injury would “fault him for having neuropathy.”

The appellate court affirmed the commission’s determination that Mr. Faszcza’s injury “clearly transpired” sometime during his day at work and was out of the course and scope of his employment, noting that evidence showed that he spent most of his work time between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. overseeing service technicians in the bays, and that testimony and photographs showed fasteners and other automotive debris on the floor of the service bays every day during this time.

The court also dismissed the employer’s contention that the commission erred in finding Mr. Faszcza’s IBD compensable. The appellate court held that the commission did not err in its termination that credible evidence supported Mr. Faszcza’s assertion that his IBD was a result of the puncture wound.