Worker's Compensation Not Undermined by Employee's Contract

Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

In the case of Schietinger v. S. New Eng Tel. Co., an employee sued an engineer to recover for damages suffered in a work-related accident. In law, economic damages are compensation for monetary expenses related to an injury, such as medical costs and even lost wages. These damages are easily verified by medical bills, invoices, and employment records. Noneconomic damages compensate individuals for non-monetary losses, which are not readily quantifiable. Examples include pain-and-suffering, loss of future enjoyment, and loss of companionship. These damages are subjective, and determined by the jury or finder of fact. For personal injury compensation, the engineer had assigned his indemnification rights against the main employer, to the employee. An indemnification agreement is created where one party agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to defend and save another party harmless from all claims and causes of action and liabilities. Because indemnification is a contractual right, it is usually assignable to others. However, an employee’s claim against an employer is preempted by his worker’s compensation entitlement, which is an exclusive remedy that mandates employer compensation for a worker’s injury.

The employee was employed by the employer, Southern New England Telephone Company, when he sustained serious personal injuries that arose out of and in the course of his employment. Sever injuries were sustained when the employee was electrocuted by an exposed power line at his work site. He had received worker’s compensation for these injuries. The employer argued that the employee could not initiate action on behalf of the indemnification rights, because he had already been compensated by the employer under the employee compensation act. The court decided in favor of the employer. There was no evidence that the employer had any breach of contractual duty in relation to the indemnification agreement. In other words, there was no contractual cause of action to make undermining the worker’s compensation act reasonable. Therefore, the initial compensation under the act preempted any additional claims against the employer.

At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained. 

Please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.

Source: Schietinger v. S. New Eng. Tel. Co., 2006 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2663 (Conn. Super. Ct. Aug. 12, 2006)