New England Legal Foundation
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission & History
    • Annual Reports
    • Board of Directors
    • State Advisory Councils >
      • Connecticut
      • Maine
      • Massachusetts
      • New Hampshire
      • Rhode Island
      • Vermont
    • Trustees
    • Members
    • Staff
    • Job & Internship Opportunities
  • News & Events
  • Docket
  • Briefs
  • Donate
  • Contact

Fredette  v. Simpson

2/4/2004

 
Co-employee Immunity under the Massachusetts Workers Compensation Act

This case raised the issue whether the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act (“Act”)  bars an employee from suing a co-employee for workplace injuries related to a piece of equipment that the co-employee had purchased for the employer’s use.  Plaintiff David Tremblay, an employee of Shield Packaging Company, was severely injured while changing a tire on a backhoe. Defendant Bruce Simpson, vice president of operations at Shield, had bought the backhoe in 1985 for Shield’s use.  Tremblay received $750,000 in workers’ compensation from Shield’s insurer for his injuries, and settled his product liability claims against the manufacturers of the backhoe. Tremblay sued Simpson, alleging Simpson was negligent in transferring the backhoe to Shield by failing to warn about the risks posed by the multi-piece tire rims, and by failing to remove these rims.  The Superior Court allowed Simpson’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that the Act bars work-related tort claims against a co-employee.  The SJC granted Tremblay’s application for direct appellate review and affirmed the Superior Court’s decision.  

NELF, on its own behalf and on behalf of Associated Industries of Massachusetts, filed a brief in support of Simpson and Shield.  The SJC agreed with NELF’s position that allowing an employee to sue a co-employee for tort liability under these circumstances would defeat the Act’s clear purpose of establishing a comprehensive and exclusive statutory remedy for work-related injuries.  In particular, the SJC adopted nearly verbatim NELF’s argument that the SJC, in a prior case, had conclusively established coemployee immunity when an employee's equipment indirectly served the employer's interest, by providing the employee with transportation to and from work.  The SJC agreed with NELF that coemployee immunity should therefore apply in this case, where the instrumentality directly serves the employer's interest, by performing services for the employer's benefit and profit.  In its brief, NELF also argued that the co-employee’s immunity from suit is part of the general quid pro quo between employer and employee that the SJC and courts from other jurisdictions have recognized under workers’ compensation statutes.  Allowing co-employee liability under the circumstances of this case would also defeat the Act’s purpose of placing the cost of industrial accidents on the employer rather than the employee.

Comments are closed.

    The Docket

    To obtain a copy of any of NELF's briefs, contact us at info@nelfonline.org.

    Categories

    All
    1st Circuit Court Of Appeals
    2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    3rd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    Business Litigation Session
    CT
    CT Superior Court
    CT Supreme Court
    Employer Employee Relationships
    February 2018
    February 2019
    Government Regulation/Administration Of Justice
    MA
    MA Appeals Court
    MA Division Of Administrative Law Appeals
    March 2015
    MA Superior Court
    MA Supreme Judicial Court
    MA US District Court
    ME
    ME Supreme Judicial Court
    NH
    NH Supreme Court
    Property Rights
    RI
    RI Supreme Court
    SCOTUS
    United States Supreme Court
    US Court Of Appeals Federal Circuit
    US District Court ME
    VT
    VT Supreme Court

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2020
    June 2020
    January 2020
    June 2019
    April 2019
    October 2018
    June 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    October 2016
    June 2016
    February 2016
    October 2015
    June 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    June 2014
    February 2014
    October 2013
    June 2013
    February 2013
    October 2012
    June 2012
    February 2012
    October 2011
    June 2011
    February 2011
    October 2010
    June 2010
    February 2010
    October 2009
    February 2009
    October 2008
    June 2008
    February 2008
    October 2007
    June 2007
    October 2006
    June 2006
    February 2006
    October 2005
    June 2005
    February 2005
    October 2004
    June 2004
    February 2004
    October 2003
    May 2003
    February 2003
    September 2002
    May 2002
    February 2002
    May 2001