Under Massachusetts law, general contractors can face liability for workplace injuries involving subcontractors’ employees, especially when subcontractors lack proper workers’ compensation coverage. It is not uncommon for parties to attempt to avoid liability, however, by claiming they have statutory immunity. In a recent case, a Massachusetts court highlighted the nuanced interplay between workers’ compensation statutes and common-law liability for general contractors. If you were hurt while working, it is important to understand your rights, and you should talk to a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney as soon as possible.
Factual Setting and Procedural Background
It is reported that the plaintiffs, representing the estate of the deceased workers, filed suit against the general contractor. Allegedly, the deceased workers, employees of an uninsured subcontractor, suffered fatal injuries when an explosion occurred at a construction site managed by the defendant. The subcontractor reportedly failed to obtain workers’ compensation insurance as required by law.
Under the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act, the defendant’s workers’ compensation insurer compensated the plaintiffs with lump sum settlements for their claims. Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a wrongful death and personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, alleging independent negligence, gross negligence, and reckless conduct. The defendant argued that the plaintiffs’ acceptance of workers’ compensation benefits released it from further liability under the Act. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiffs appealed.
Liability for Independent Negligence
On appeal, the court reviewed the statutory framework and the applicability of workers’ compensation provisions to general contractor liability. The court focused on whether Becker’s payment of workers’ compensation benefits on behalf of the uninsured subcontractor shielded it from liability for independent negligence.
The court analyzed the 1971 amendment to the workers’ compensation statute, which abolished the common employment doctrine that had previously barred subcontractors’ employees from suing general contractors. It is reported that the court emphasized two key conditions for immunity under Sections 23 and 24: the employer must be both insured and the direct employer of the injured employee. The defendant was neither the direct employer of the deceased workers nor the entity primarily liable for their employment.
The court rejected the defendant’s argument that Section 23 shielded it from common-law claims due to its payment of workers’ compensation benefits. Instead, the court highlighted that these payments stemmed from the defendant’s statutory obligation under Section 18, which does not confer immunity from third-party lawsuits. The court further clarified that allowing the defendant to avoid liability would undermine the statutory purpose of incentivizing general contractors to ensure their subcontractors carry proper insurance coverage.
Ultimately, the court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding that the plaintiffs could pursue their claims for independent negligence and wrongful death.
Talk to a Capable Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Attorney
If you were hurt while working, it is smart to talk to an attorney about your options for protecting your interests. Attorney James K. Meehan is a capable Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney with the skills and resources needed to help you seek the best outcome possible. You can reach Attorney Meehan at 508-822-6600 or via our online form to arrange a confidential conference.