What Goes Around Comes Around: IRS Employee May Not Recover for Stress Associated with Pursuing Injury Claim

In a case replete with irony, as many of us scurry around gathering the plethora of information required to file our annual individual income tax returns, a federal district court held it had no subject matter jurisdiction to entertain an action filed by an IRS employee who sought monetary damages from the IRS and its Workers’ Compensation Branch for “undue work and stress” associated with gathering records required to have her medical bills paid [Coachman v. IRS Worker Comp., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37226 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 4, 2020)]. Finding the employee’s sole remedy was under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, the court dismissed the employee’s civil complaint.

Background

Plaintiff, an IRS employee, suffered injuries after falling outside a federal building in March 2017. She filed a workers' compensation claim, which the Department of Labor accepted for back and shoulder injuries. She subsequently filed the instant action, contending that she spent months working to gather records required to have her medical bills paid. According to the plaintiff, the process was “stressful and time consuming” because some offices either were not prompt in their responses for completed the paperwork incorrectly. She contended at several points, she was sent to multiple locations to gather information and data.

Motion to Dismiss

The federal defendants filed a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss, contending the court had no subject matter jurisdiction in that the plaintiff’s sole remedy was pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (“FECA”) and that plaintiff’s claim had already been accepted.

Court Ruling

The district court agreed with the IRS that because plaintiff was a federal employee whose claims were “with respect to” injuries she suffered in the course and scope of her employment [quoting 5 U.S.C.S. § 8116(c)], there was no jurisdiction to hear the case. Citing Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Gizoni, 502 U.S. 81, 90, 112 S. Ct. 486, 116 L. Ed. 2d 405 (1991), the court added that where the Secretary of Labor had, as was the case here, determined that the FECA applied, the district court could hear no part of the dispute.