قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / The Supreme Court allows the lawsuit for parking damage to continue

The Supreme Court allows the lawsuit for parking damage to continue



Oklahoma’s Supreme Court said on Wednesday that a worker who was seriously injured while crossing a busy highway to get to work can sue his employer.

The state’s highest court, which decides Harwood v Ardagh Group, stated that workers comp is not an exclusive remedy for injuries that are defined by law as not arising from employment.

“We agree that if there is a claim for negligence for this reason, it is covered by tort law and can be brought in the district court and that refusal of benefits to employee compensation because an employee was not” during employment “does not preclude such negligence, says the court.

Jerry Harwood worked for Ardagh Group̵

7;s glass factory in Sapulpa, Oklahoma. The facility is located on the west side of Oklahoma Highway 66, and workers were instructed to use two parking ears on the east side of the highway.

Mr. Harwood was hit by a car returning to the parking lot after completing a pass in July 2016 and sustained serious injuries that left him permanently and completely disabled.

An administrative law judge ruled that Mr. Harwood’s injuries were not compensable because he was injured on a public road, that Ardagh did not own or control the site and that the accident did not occur due to employment. The Workers’ Injury Commission confirmed, as did the Civil Court of Appeal.

Mr Harwood then sued his employer, claiming that the company had negligently failed to ensure adequate lighting and protection for employees using the crosswalk.

A court in April 2019 dismissed the lawsuit and ruled that Ardagh was not obliged to make the crossing point safer. An amended petition was also rejected.

The majority opinion from the Supreme Court said that an analysis of state laws was crucial to reach its decision.

“Since we have considered that the employer may have assumed the obligation to provide a safer pedestrian crossing for access to an employer designated car park, the employee has relied on a case of relief which is legally possible,” the court concluded. “The courthouse doors are open to the employee. Whether or not the employer’s conduct was the immediate cause of the plaintiff’s injury is up to the jury to decide. “

Three judges disagreed and said they did not believe the employer had an obligation to make the crossing safe.

WorkCompCentral is a sister magazine to Business Insurance. More stories here.


Source link