Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Construing California law, a federal district court held a plaintiff's IIED tort action filed against her former employer for failure to provide adequate COVID-19 protocols is barred by the exclusive remedy of California's workers' compensation law. The court dismissed the IIED claim and a negligent supervision claim as well. It allowed a constructive discharge claim to move forward, however. As to the employer's exclusivity defense, the court indicated the plaintiff's IIED allegations, as well as the negligent supervision allegations, were nothing more than a claim that the employer had failed to maintain a safe and healthy workplace. Those sorts of claims easily fell within the exclusive remedy rule, said the court.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Brooks v. Corecivic of Tenn. LLC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162429 (S.D. Cal., Sept. 4, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 104.05.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.