Manuel Torres installed tires for Parkhouse Tire Service in San Diego. One day while he was working on his knees, Parkhouse sales representative Roy Naas sneaked up behind Torres, grabbed his back-support belt, lifted him off the ground and dropped him back on his knees. Torres suffered a serious back injury and couldn’t return to work. He tried to get around the workers’ compensation laws and sued both Parkhouse and Naas for damages. But now the California Supreme Court has ruled that workers’ comp benefits were his sole remedy.
Employee Seeks Damages From Co-Worker
Torres claimed in his lawsuit that the attack was malicious and that Parkhouse condoned it by only mildly disciplining Naas—and therefore could be sued. Parkhouse and Naas responded that the incident was merely innocent horseplay and that Torres could only collect workers’ comp benefits and couldn’t sue in court. A Court of Appeal sided with Torres, finding he could sue for damages even if Naas intended no harm.
400+ pages of state-specific, easy-read reference materials at your fingertips—fully updated! Check out the Guide to Employment Law for California Employers and get up to speed on everything you need to know.
Damages Available Only If Intent To Injure
The California Supreme Court has now raised the bar for suing co-workers for work-related injuries. Generally, workers’ compensation is an injured employee’s exclusive remedy, even if a co-worker caused the injury. The injured employee can sue the co-worker, however, if the injury is caused by a willful and unprovoked physical act of aggression. The high court now says this means the co-worker must have intended to injure the employee.
The court went on to explain that typical workplace “frolicking and horseplay” doesn’t rise to this standard. And even if the risk of injury may have been obvious, that isn’t sufficient to allow the injured employee to get around the workers’ comp system.
Impose Limits To Avoid Problems
Despite this ruling, you should still limit workplace horseplay and roughhousing. Such behavior can quickly get out of hand, leading to injuries that could put you on the hook for workers’ comp benefits and possibly higher workers’ comp insurance premiums. And even though the court established the tough intent-to-injure standard for suing co-workers, you could still become entangled in a lawsuit over whether the co-worker meant to cause the injury or if you’re responsible for the behavior because you condoned it.
To avoid problems, consider implementing a policy prohibiting roughhousing or other inappropriate conduct that could cause injury. The policy can be incorporated into your injury and illness prevention program. Also, inform employees that besides risking termination, they could be held personally liable for aggressive behavior that injures a co-worker. Finally, be sure to investigate all misconduct claims and, if warranted, discipline the offender appropriately. If an injured employee sues and claims you’re responsible for a co-worker’s misconduct because you condoned it, these steps will be evidence that you didn’t.