Mississippi Verdict Could Erode Employer Protections

Friday, March 28, 2008 | 0

By Foster Welburn

The Mississippi's Workers' Compensation Act generally guarantees to employees the right to receive pre-determined compensation benefits for workplace accidental injuries without the need to prove the employer's fault.  In exchange for guaranteed benefits, the Workers' Compensation Act prohibits employees from suing their employer for such injuries, and instead requires employees to look to available workers' compensation benefits as their sole remedy, as long as the employer did not "intend" to cause harm.

In a case currently pending before the Mississippi Supreme Court, several employees obtained a $7.4 million jury verdict including compensatory and punitive damages against their employer for injuries they claimed were the result of long-term exposure to glue compounds used during manufacture. In <i>Tedford, et al. v. Franklin Corp.</i>, the employees filed a lawsuit against their employer rather than seeking workers' compensation benefits, claiming that the employer knew that employee injuries were "substantially certain" to result from exposure to the glue compound.

Although Franklin Corp. asked the trial court to dismiss the employees' claims based on the argument that Mississippi's Workers' Compensation Act provided the employees "exclusive" remedy for their injuries, the trial court instead allowed the jury to decide whether the Act applied to the employees' claims based on whether Franklin Corporation knew that injuries were "substantially certain."  

Because the appeal concerns the scope of the Workers' Compensation Act and the right of Mississippi employers to rely on the Act's general prohibition of tort lawsuits against employers for workplace injuries, the Mississippi Manufacturers Association, the association's Workers' Compensation Group and the American Insurance Association have asked the Mississippi Supreme Court for permission to file a brief in support of Franklin Corp.'s appeal of the $7.4 million verdict.

In their brief, the MMA, the MMA Workers' Compensation Group and the AIA argue that the trial court's decision to allow a jury to decide whether the Workers' Compensation Act applied to plaintiffs' claims violated the Workers' Compensation Commission's right to decide whether the employees' claims were compensable under the Act. It is also argued, alternatively, that the trial court applied an expansive view as to the type of employer conduct which would satisfy the "intentional injury" exception to the Act's exclusive remedy provision.

Essentially, if the jury verdict against Franklin Corp. were allowed to stand, it would signify an erosion of the employer's protection against lawsuits and damages exposure provided by Mississippi's workers' compensation law.  Marjorie O'Donnell of the Clayton O'Donnell law firm (Oxford office) was retained to file the brief on behalf of the MMA, the MMA Workers' Compensation Group and the AIA.

<i>Foster Welburn is director of the Mississippi Workers Compensation Group.</i>