The Supreme Court of Connecticut recently affirmed a trial court’s Order granting summary judgment in favor of an employer in a civil action alleging intentional tort filed against it by an injured employee in spite of the employee’s contentions that he had been told by his supervisor that he could be fired if he shut down the bagging machine and where he also claimed that the supervisor had instructed him to dislodge jammed bags while the machine was still running. The high court observed that in order to fall within the exception to the Workers' Compensation Act's exclusivity provisions, the employer, or its alter ego, must have intended the act and have known that the injury was substantially certain to occur from the act. Quoting Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the Court also noted that the alter ego test was stringent, and that it was functional, the court offered that liability to the employer would generally be denied where the supervisory employee was merely a typical foreman or supervisor.
Reported by Thomas A. Robinson, J.D.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Patel v. Flexo Converters U.S.A., Inc., 309 Conn. 52, 2013 Conn. LEXIS 211 (June 25, 2013) [2013 Conn. LEXIS 211 (June 25, 2013)].
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 103.04 [103.04].
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.