Torts Ii

Front 1

Workers compensation

Back 1

whenever someone is injured on the job they are entitled to immediate benefits.  Whenever someone is injured on the job they are entitled to immediate benefits, loss of pay, disability,
 You are entitled even if the employer had no responsibility for your accident because it is a form of strict liability
 The employer (with a few exceptions) is immune from tort liability. You get immediate benefits you do not have the right to sue your employer.
 You cannot wave the benefit and have access to the courts. The exclusive remedy is receiving workers compensation benefits.

Front 2

What happens if the employeers have acted intentionally?

Back 2

 Where the employers have acted intentionally. Limits compensation to what you could have recovered for total recoverability. In the event of death It is 67 percent of your total salary. NO pain and suffering.

Front 3

Is there any negligence action?

Back 3

No, not negligence but maybe an intentional tort as to the employer. It is going to be hard to make that argument. Some jurisdictions recognize is when you violate a safety standard or regulation. But again to date have not found an example of this.

Front 4

Would recieving workers compensation apply to the collateral source rule?

Back 4

 This would be a collateral payment because you got it from your employer. This would be a payment that would qualify under the rule.

Front 5

Employee Exceptions to getting compensation:

Back 5

• Intoxication
• Self inflicted

Front 6

What is the difference between a Special Verdict and General Verdict?

Back 6

• General verdict form: “Guilty” yes or no? There are no real guidelines
• Special Verdict: will break the question down into very special and specific aspects. Did the D act unreasonably? Yes? Go to question five.
o Also there are damages questions that are asked
o The question we are dealing with is how do you allocate responsibility for P’s damages assuming 100 percent responsibility
o P was 20 percent, D (employer) 60 percent and manufacturer 20 percent of the responsibility. These numbers are given by the jury
o We know that the employer is not responsible even though he is on the verdict. Whether the P is entitle to recover from the manufacturer. It could be 0. if in a jurisdiction that has contributory negligence.
o or it could be 20 if you just sue the manufacturer
o or if we are recognizing joint several liability it could be 80.

Front 7

Test for assessing the employers deliberate intent

Back 7

1st- the emplyer is liable if it acts "with a consciously, subjectively and deliberately formed intention to produce a specific result of injury or death to an employee
2nd- The employee may establishe the requisite intent by proving: (1) unsafe conditions (2) the employer's "subjective realization and appreciation" of that unsafe working condition.

Front 8

Is Workers Compensation Subject to subrogation?

Back 8

• P was injured sue manufacturer. P already received 50 thousand from workers comp. D wants it entered into the evidence that you have already received this benefit. If she recovers the lost wages Workers compensation is subject to subrogation. Therefore the P has to pay back his employer.

Front 9

What is dual capacity? And when can an employer sue for it?

Back 9

• Occasionally the employer is also the manufacturer. WC does not preclude the P from suing from another capacity. This is called dual capacity. But, can not sue for the negligence. The P could sue for products liability.

Front 10

What is automobile no-fault insurance?

Back 10

It is coverage in which benefits are awarded regardless of fault and the right to sue for pain and suffering is permitted only after satisfying a statutory threshold. this is only covering benefits from your own insurance company. This is called no fault insurance. The reason why a number of jurisdiction’s like Michigan they found that too large a percentage of the premium dollar was not coming back to you. Thought get benefits faster. The liability is with you and you can recover from your insurance benefits.
* ALl no fault plans reduce transaction costs.
* Matches compensation more closely with economic loss
* Eliminates compensation for noneconomic loss, such as pain and suffering, for injured people below the threshold
* Generally speed up compensation.

****Tort liability you are able to sue for the injuries that you get in court. All the other accidents you go to your insurance company to get your costs. ***

Front 11

Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemical

Back 11

Eight current or former employees and a number of their spouses appealed from a judgment of the Court of Appeals, Hamilton County, affirming holding of the Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, dismissing action against employer and defendant employees by plaintiff employees seeking compensatory and punitive damages arising out of their exposure to fumes and otherwise noxious characteristics of certain chemicals. The Supreme Court, William B. Brown, J., held that: (1) an employee is not precluded by section of State Constitution or by sections of Workers' Compensation Act from enforcing his common-law remedies against his employer for an intentional tort, and (2) complaint stated a cause of action on theory that employees were exposed to fumes and otherwise noxious characteristics of certain chemicals within scope of their employment.