A worker cannot recover benefits from his employee's car insurance because his claims are prohibited by the exclusive action in the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
In Shakes Against Shelter Mutual Insurance Company ., The state Supreme Court unanimously held in an en-banc hearing that Walmart Inc. employee, who was injured while driving in his employee's car during employment, can not recover uninsured / underinsured car benefits from his employee's policy despite the negligent driving of his employee.
Kent Ryser and two of his associates, Linda Forster and Sherri Babion, all worked for Walmart when they were returning from a business trip in a car owned by Babion but driven at the time of the incident by Forster, who fell asleep at the wheel. which resulted in the car hitting a dike according to legal documents.
Mr. Ryser suffered significant injuries in the accident and received compensation for workers. He also applied for benefits from his own car insurance and Mrs. Babion's car insurer, Shelter Mutual Insurance Co., for uninsured car benefits. Shelter denied the allegation.
Mr. Ryser then sued Shelter, arguing that because Forster was immune from liability under the Workers' Compensation Act and was an "effectively uninsured" driver of Mrs. Babion's car, he was entitled to claim benefits for her actions under Mrs. Babion's [1
Colorado The Supreme Court upheld the decision in the Court of Appeal and noted that the "expansive wording" in the Colorado Workers' Compensation Act excluded Mr. Ryser's claim against his employees' insurance company.