Kansas High Court Reviews Packing Plant Work Injury Case

January 01, 2012 (Press-News.org) The Kansas Supreme Court recently reviewed a case involving a personal injury suffered at a Dodge City beef packing plant. In Herrell v. National Beef, the court held that the landowner could be held liable for a work injury to a subcontractor's employee based on the legal concept of premises liability, even if the worker was already collecting workers' compensation benefits.

The plaintiff worked for a company that was performing soil tests at the packing plant as part of a construction project on the rendering building. National Beef decided to have the work done while the rendering plant continued operations.

The woman suffered a knee injury while walking through the rendering building after stepping off a ledge and into a hole that she and her co-worker testified was covered with rendering products. The fellow employee also testified that he saw that a grate was present and the hole had been made visible after the workplace accident.

Seeking Compensation for Work Injuries From All Responsible Parties

The injured worker was unable to continue to perform her job and began to receive workers' compensation benefits. But she also filed a third-party claim against National Beef, alleging that the company had been negligent in creating, maintaining and failing to warn of a dangerous condition on its premises.

During trial, issues arose regarding a violation of OSHA regulations that had been introduced as evidence by the injury victim, as well as existing Kansas case law with respect to third-party liability for worker injuries. The jury found that the defendant packing company was liable for nearly half of the plaintiff's damages based on comparative fault, and assessed the damages caused by the accident at over $250,000.

National Beef appealed, arguing that it did not have a duty to the plaintiff, based largely on Dillard v. Strecker, a previous case involving third-party negligence. The Court of Appeals of Kansas reversed the lower court verdict and damages judgment, holding that the plaintiff had not presented a theory of liability upon which the packing plant could be held accountable. Relying on Dillard, the appellate court concluded that "an employee of an independent contractor covered by workers' compensation insurance cannot recover in negligence from the landowner, regardless of the employee's underlying theory of the landowner's liability."

The Supreme Court of Kansas granted review and disagreed with the Court of Appeals, holding that National Beef bore a duty of reasonable care to the subcontractor's employee. The court distinguished the Dillard holding because it dealt with theories of landowner liability that were distinct from premises-related claims. The court was also swayed by the plain language of the Kansas Workers Compensation Act, which details the limitation and authorization of third-party remedies.

However, the court also held that the portion of the plaintiff's claim that sought liability for an OSHA violation was foreclosed by its previous holding in Dillard. Because the trial court had not required the jury to explain the extent to which this theory of liability caused the harm, the Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings to clarify that distinction.

Helping Injured Workers Explore All Avenues for Compensation

While workers' compensation benefits are usually the exclusive legal remedy for an injured employee against his or her employer, third-party claims can play an important role when another party's negligence is involved or the employee is engaged in an inherently dangerous activity. This legal remedy can be particularly important after a workplace accident that causes serious or catastrophic injuries, including amputations, brain injuries, spinal injuries and paralysis, as well as accidents that result in wrongful death.

The role of an experienced work injury attorney includes helping a client immediately assess the evidence to preserve all of a client's legal options. For instance, in this case the evidence of the hole in the floor was soon eliminated due to the completion of the construction project.

By acting quickly to preserve all evidence of negligence that creates dangerous premises, a personal injury lawyer can keep all theories of liability in play while the full extent of injury is determined. Because of the considerable financial pressures that can be caused by lost income, medical expenses, adaptive equipment, and a temporary or permanent disability, a workplace injury victim may often need to look beyond the basic benefits available through a Kansas or Missouri work comp claim.

Article provided by Adler & Manson
Visit us at www.adlerandmanson.com