Massachusetts Injury Lawyers Blog
The Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act) provides employees with the right to seek benefits from their employers for workplace harm, but in exchange for that right, they are barred from pursuing personal injury claims against their employers. Generally, insurers provide such benefits and defend employers in any lawsuits arising from such claims. If an employer fails to assert essential defenses, though, their insurer may deny them coverage, as demonstrated in a recent Massachusetts case. If you were hurt at work, it is smart to meet with a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation lawyer to examine what steps you can take to protect your interests.
History of the Case
It is alleged that a former employee of the plaintiff, the employer, filed a civil lawsuit alleging gender discrimination and wrongful termination. The employee’s spouse also claimed loss of consortium and support. Under Massachusetts law, employees who do not preserve their right to common law claims through written notice at the time of hire are barred from seeking common law remedies for injuries compensable under the workers’ compensation statute. In this case, the employee did not preserve such rights and did not file a claim for workers’ compensation benefits.
Reportedly, the plaintiff notified its workers’ compensation insurer, the defendant, and requested defense coverage. The defendant refused, arguing that the insurance policy did not cover the claims made in the civil lawsuit. The plaintiff assumed its own defense, settled the case through arbitration, and sought reimbursement from the insurer for the arbitration award, legal fees, and additional damages. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurer, ruling that the plaintiff was not entitled to reimbursement, as it should have invoked the exclusivity defense of the workers’ compensation statute. The plaintiff appealed the decision.
Personal Injury vs Workers’ Compensation Claims
On appeal, the court examined whether the insurer had a duty to defend the employer under either the workers’ compensation or employers’ liability sections of the insurance policy. Part One of the policy covered claims for benefits under the workers’ compensation statute, while Part Two excluded coverage for damages arising from employee discrimination or wrongful termination.
The trial court initially held that the insurer might have a duty to defend based on the emotional distress claims, as they could be interpreted as covered under Part One. However, the court disagreed. It ruled that because the employee had not filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, the complaint did not state a claim that would result in liability under the workers’ compensation policy.
The court found that workers’ compensation claims must be adjudicated through the statutory system, not through civil litigation, and that the employer should have invoked the statutory defense of workers’ compensation exclusivity.
The court emphasized the difference between claims for benefits under workers’ compensation and civil claims for damages, concluding that the insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify the employer in the civil suit. Accordingly, the court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the insurer.
Confer with a Skilled Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer
If you suffered an injury while on the job, you may be entitled to workers’ compensation benefits from your employer, and it is important to consult with a lawyer promptly. Attorney James K. Meehan is a skilled Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney who can guide you through your legal options and help you to pursue a fair resolution. To schedule a confidential consultation, you can reach Attorney Meehan at 508-822-6600 or through our online form.