Partner Jeffery Bairey and associate Lauren Koblitz of the San Francisco office obtained a dismissal from plaintiff in advance of responding to plaintiff's complaint in a tractor-trailer roll-over accident. They represented three named defendants, one of whom was plaintiff's direct employer at the time of the incident. Plaintiff's complaint alleged a single cause of action for "Intentional Misrepresentation."
Specifically, plaintiff's complaint alleged, in relevant part, that plaintiff was informed and believed that defendant employer knew that the vehicle plaintiff was driving at the time of the incident was not properly maintained and serviced and furthermore that employer's vehicles were not in full compliance with the California Biennial Inspection of Terminals ("BIT") program. Plaintiff alleged further that on this basis his employer made false representations to plaintiff about the vehicle's status and safety and furthermore that employer intended that plaintiff rely on the false representations of the vehicle's maintenance and status in order for their business to continue on schedule.
Dismissal of defendants was proper because Labor Code section 3600 et seq. provides plaintiff's exclusive remedy. In this case, the acts as alleged by plaintiff amounted to nothing more than negligence, not intentional acts. There was no evidence of fraud by the defendants, as alleged in plaintiff's Complaint, to bring the action within an exception to the exclusive remedy provisions of the workers' compensation laws. Appellate courts hold that "plaintiff must do more than vaguely allege intentional misconduct. The modern view respecting actionable intentional misconduct by the employer is that it must be alleged and provided that the employer acted deliberately with the specific intent to inure the employee." (Stalnaker v. Boeing Co. (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1295, 1301; Roberts v. Pup 'N' Taco Driveup (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 278, 283; see also Royster v. Montanez (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 362; Williams v. International Paper Co. (1982) 129 Cal.App.3d 810, 818-819).
Furthermore, the California Supreme Court has held that actions are barred by the exclusivity provisions of the workers' compensation system even when an employer allegedly engages in intentional deceit.
'. . . [If] an action at law were allowed as a remedy, many cases cognizable under workers' compensation would also be prosecuted outside that system. The focus of the inquiry in a case involving work-related injury would often be not whether the injury arose out of and in the course of employment, but the state of knowledge of the employer and the employee regarding the dangerous condition which caused the injury. Such a result would undermine the underlying premise upon which the workers' compensation system is based. That system balances the advantage to the employer of immunity from liability at law against the detriment of relatively swift and certain compensation payments. Conversely, while the employee receives expeditious compensation, he surrenders his right to a potentially larger recovery in a common law action for the negligence or willful misconduct of his employer. This balance would be significantly disturbed if we were to hold, as plaintiff urges, that any misconduct of an employer which may be characterized as intentional warrants an action at law for damages. It seems clear that Labor Code section 4553 is the sole remedy for additional compensation against an employer whose employee is injured in the first instance as the result of a deliberate failure to assure that the physical environment of the work place is safe. (United States Borax & Chem. Corp. v. Superior Court (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 406, 409-411; Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Superior Court (1980) 27 Cal.3d 465, 474; accord Royster v. Montanez (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 362, 370-373; Williams v. International Paper Co. (1982) 129 Cal.App.3d 810, 816-819.)'"
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
