|
The Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Oct. 16 on its much criticized Entergy ruling. The court should follow
up on the hearing by reversing a ruling that was deeply unfair to injured workers and was called unjustified even by an
association of lawyers who represent business owners and insurers.
The Entergy case involved one of those legal issues that can set listeners to yawning when explained - but when put into
practice in the real world, inflicts terrible hardships on the personal lives of people who have been horribly injured
while at work.
The legal issue is whether a plant owner who hires a contractor to perform work - maintenance, for example - can escape
liability in a lawsuit if one of the contractor's workers is injured on the job.
For years, the answer in Texas has been simple: No. The injured worker could sue the plant owner, submitting a negligence
claim to judge and jury. That was true even if the contractor carried Workers' Compensation insurance - the contractor
could not be sued, but the plant owner could.
However, a general contractor could purchase Workers' Compensation insurance and apply it to any subcontractor's employees
it in turn hired to do work at the plant. That way, general contractors were encouraged to carry Workers' Compensation
insurance, which ensured that injured workers would have their medical bills covered and get some of their lost pay
covered.
There were proposals to extend immunity to the plant owner over the years, but the Legislature rejected them. The argument
against giving plant owners immunity from lawsuits by injured workers was that it would eliminate a powerful incentive
for maintaining high safety standards.
Then, Entergy Gulf States Inc., an electric utility, decided to punch out a new loophole. When a contract worker, John
Summers, was seriously injured in 2001 at one of its facilities, Entergy claimed status as general contractor and,
therefore, immunity to suit. After all, Entergy said, the worker already had Workers' Compensation insurance from the
"subcontractor" that Entergy had paid for.
A district judge agreed with Entergy, but a state appeals court sided with the injured worker, who wanted to sue Entergy
for damages.
When the Texas Supreme Court ruled 9-0 for Entergy, it threw labor activists and the legal community that focuses on
injured workers into an uproar. Several key legislators of both parties have told the court - whose nine Republicans had
promised not to legislate from the bench - that it had clearly ignored legislative intent.
In fact, the Entergy decision was so far removed from settled law that even the Texas Association of Defense Counsel has
called on the court to reverse it. The association's members generally represent those being sued - like plant owners.
The court has a chance here to correct itself and should take it. Injured contract workers should be able to take their
allegations of negligence to a jury.
|
The Texas Supreme Court should reverse its ruling that would limit the right of contract workers to sue for damages when
injured on the job.