LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
intentional accidental road sign

exclusive remedy rule

Georgia: Parent’s Wrongful Death Action for Negligent Hiring of Convicted Felon May Proceed

Where an employee was shot and killed by a co-employee on the special employer’s premises for no apparent reason—the two hardly knew each other and had no difficulties with each at work—the death did not arise out of and in the course of the employment. Accordingly, the exclusive remedy...

Federal: Employee’s Civil Action for Damages Associated With Radioactive Dust May Proceed

Allegations that an employer knew of the risks and dangers of encountering failed radioactive fuel plates when it ordered an employee to repackage and/or continue the repackaging process, that it failed to warn the employee of the dangers, failed to follow federal safety regulations, and intentionally...

Illinois: Acceptance of Comp Benefits Is Election Barring Intentional Tort Case Against Employer

Where a paramedic trainee, who sustained injuries while participating in a training program, filed suit against his employer and others alleging an intentional tort, but later sought and received workers’ compensation benefits for the injury, his acceptance of benefits operated as an election and...

Opt-Out Lessons From Lone Star State

Shining the Real Light on So-Called Texas Opt Outs By Thomas A. Robinson, co-author Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law As Lex Larson and I point out in the opening article in Workers’ Compensation Emerging Issues Analysis , 2015 Edition, 2016 will shape up to be an important one...

Texas: Police Sergeant’s Widow May Not Recover Wrongful Death Benefits Against Police Department

A widow’s civil action to recover damages from the Houston Police Department related to an incident in which her husband, a police sergeant, was killed in the line of duty by a man who was present in this country illegally, and who was subsequently convicted of the police sergeant’s murder...

Alabama: Removal of Safety Equipment Does Not Expose Employer to Tort Liability

Allegations that an employer removed “explosion doors” from a furnace and that a furnace explosion subsequently injured a furnace operator were insufficient to state a cause of action against the employer; the claim was barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Alabama Workers’...

IAIABC Taking Part in Shaping the Future of Workers’ Compensation

By Jennifer C. Jordan, Esq., General Counsel, MEDVAL, LLC On April 20, 2016, the IAIABC kicked off the National Conversation on the Future of Workers’ Compensation at its Forum in Santa Fe, New Mexico. In a three hour session, questions were presented to about 100 attendees to debate in round...

Wisconsin: Comp Insurer Need Not Defend Employee Accused of Sexual Assault on Co-Employee

An employer’s workers’ compensation insurer had no duty to defend an employee, Rydberg, who had been sued by af co-employee who claimed that Rydberg sexually groped her while both were at work on the employer’s premises. The Wisconsin appellate court indicated that the co-employee had...

Federal: Leased Employee May Not Sue Leasing “Employer”

Where corporation A supplied licensed truck drivers to corporation B—an affiliated entity—under a three-year agreement under which the drivers worked at B’s facilities, but remained employees of A, who paid the drivers their wages and taxes, and retained total control over labor negotiations...

Florida: An Overview of Recent Decisions on Constitutionality of Workers’ Compensation Act

By Robert J. Grace, Jr., Esq., The Bleakley Bavol Law Firm, and Lyle Platt, Esq., Clarke & Platt, P.A. For two years now we have written about a collection of cases which represent the most closely watched and eagerly anticipated workers’ compensation cases since our statute went into effect...

California: Top 25 Noteworthy Panel Decisions (January-June 2016)

LexisNexis has picked the top “noteworthy” panel decisions issued by the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board during the period January through June 2016. The list features a number of decisions addressing utilization review time deadlines and reporting requirements, several...

North Dakota: Widow’s Tort Action Fails Under State’s “Almost Impossibly Strict Standard” for Intentional Tort Allegations

The Supreme Court of North Dakota held the trial court properly granted a former employer’s summary judgment dismissing a widow’s wrongful death action against it because the facts alleged did not provide a genuine issue of material fact to avoid the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workforce...

Connecticut: Contractor With Contractor Controlled Insurance Program Enjoyed Immunity

A general contractor that implemented a contractor controlled insurance program (CCIP) to centralize the purchasing of workers’ compensation insurance for a major project has “paid compensation benefits” to the employees of its subcontractors, entitling it to “principal employer”...

North Carolina: Employee’s Tort Action Against Plant Nurses Fails Because of Exclusive Remedy Defense

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina affirmed a dismissal of a plaintiff-employee’s medical malpractice action against two registered nurses who were employed at a packing company’s medical clinic where it appeared the plaintiff was also a packing company employee and she had sought treatment...

Alaska: Former Employer May Proceed Against Physician and Employer’s Attorney Involved in Attempt to Terminate Workers’ Compensation Benefits

In a split decision, the Supreme Court of Alaska held that where a plaintiff (a former employee) and his spouse sued the former employer, its workers’ compensation insurer, a private investigator, the employer’s attorney, and a doctor who performed an employer’s medical evaluation ...

Alabama: Former Employee’s Civil Action Alleging Assault and Battery Barred by Exclusivity

A trial court should have dismissed a former employee’s assault and battery and tort-of-outrage claims against the former employer because they were barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Alabama Workers’ Compensation Act, held the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Court noted that...

Florida: Unrelated Works Exception Does Not Apply to Employees of “Horizontal” Subcontractors

As is the case with the majority of jurisdictions, Florida employees generally may not sue co-employees in tort where the alleged tortfeasor was acting in furtherance of the employer’s business. Co-employee immunity is limited in Florida, however, where the co-employee is assigned primarily to...

Louisiana: Teacher’s Intentional Tort Action Against School Board Fails

A teacher, who was six-weeks pregnant at the time of a classroom incident that resulted in her injury, may not maintain a tort action against the school board; her allegations failed to raise an issue of intentional tort and her civil action was, therefore, barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of...

New York: Opera Singer Can Sue Metropolitan Opera House for Injuries Sustained in Fall

A prominent opera singer at the Metropolitan Opera House is not an employee of the entertainment facility that featured her in more than 500 performances during his 23-year career; her employment contract was with her personal holding company and not the opera house, held a New York appellate court....

Washington: Employee Can Sue Co-Employee in Tort for Injuries Sustained in After-Hours Accident

Adopting the dominant rule discussed in Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law , Ch. 111, § 111.03, the Supreme Court of Washington held that a co-employee enjoys immunity under the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s workers’ compensation law only when that co-employee...

United States: Michigan Federal Court Reiterates that RICO May Not Be Used for Bad Faith Claims

Citing two earlier precedents, a federal district court sitting in Michigan has once again ruled, in pertinent part, that racketeering activity leading to a loss or diminution of benefits that a plaintiff expects to receive under a state workers compensation system does not constitute an injury to “business...

North Carolina: Workers’ Involved in “Ultra-hazardous” Activity May Not Sue Employers in Tort

A North Carolina appellate court held that the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act apply to bar civil actions against the employer for all employees—even those that are engaged in “ultra-hazardous” activity. Acknowledging that at common law...

United States: Wrongful Death Action Following Explosion of Mortar Shell Barred by Exclusivity

Construing Illinois law, a federal district court held that plaintiff’s wrongful death action against the decedent’s employer was barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act [see 820 ILCS 305/5] where the decedent was killed by the explosion of...