Bowman v. Sunoco, Inc.
620 Pa. 28
| Pa. | 2013Background
- Bowman, a private security guard, signed a Workers’ Compensation Disclaimer as a condition of employment with Allied Barton Security Services.
- She was injured while guarding a Sunoco refinery and received workers’ compensation benefits.
- She sued Sunoco for negligence alleging failure to maintain safe conditions.
- Allied moved for judgment on the pleadings arguing the disclaimer barred the claim.
- Lower courts held the disclaimer did not violate § 204(a) and granted judgment for Sunoco.
- This Court granted review to decide whether a third-party disclaimer conflicts with the public policy of the Workers’ Compensation Act.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 204(a) voids a third‑party waiver in a workers’ compensation disclaimer | Bowman argues the disclaimer violates § 204(a)’s public policy | Sunoco contends § 204(a) applies only to employer liability, not third parties | No; § 204(a) does not void the third‑party waiver under these facts |
| Whether the disclaimer undermines the Act’s dual recovery or subrogation policy | Bowman asserts waiver conflicts with subrogation and public policy | Sunoco argues law permits third‑party waivers and subrogation waivers are permissible | Discretion supported; waiver does not violate public policy given Article II/III framework |
| Whether the waiver is valid under contract principles and not an invalid release of unaccrued claims | Bowman treats waiver as premature release of future claims | Sunoco treats waiver as future‑oriented release within permissible scope | Waiver valid as limited to injuries covered by workers’ compensation and future claims contemplated by the agreement |
Key Cases Cited
- Bowman v. Sunoco, Inc., 986 A.2d 883 (Pa. Super. 2009) (appeals court decision on public policy of § 204(a))
- Inman v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 641 A.2d 329 (Pa. Super. 1994) (§ 204(a) prohibits employer from holding employee harmless for future injury)
- Brubacher Excavating, Inc. v. WCAB (Bridges), 835 A.2d 1273 (Pa. 2003) (subrogation rights may be waived by employer)
- Dale Mfg. Co. v. Bressi, 421 A.2d 653 (Pa. 1980) (public policy and subrogation considerations in workers’ comp)
- Buttermore v. Aliquippa Hospital, 561 A.2d 733 (Pa. 1989) (exemplifies waivers of unaccrued claims under certain contexts)
- Nissley v. Candytown Motorcycle Club, Inc., 913 A.2d 887 (Pa. Super. 2006) (exculpatory clause in release analyzed for scope)