549 P.3d 1260
Okla.2024Background
- David Knox, an employee of BJ’s Oilfield Construction, died in a workplace accident while working on a solar facility project.
- His widow received workers’ compensation benefits and also sued various parties in district court, including OG&E (site owner), SunPower (prime contractor), Moss (subcontractor), and BJ’s Oilfield.
- SunPower, seeking indemnity or contribution, filed a third-party petition against BJ’s Oilfield, alleging that BJ’s was liable under indemnity provisions in its contract with Moss and for intentional tort.
- The district court dismissed SunPower's third-party petition against BJ’s Oilfield, citing the workers’ compensation exclusive remedy provision (85A O.S. § 5).
- SunPower appealed, arguing the exclusive remedy did not preclude its contract-based or intentional tort-based indemnity claims.
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court reversed the dismissal, holding the exclusivity provision barred negligence tort claims but did not bar contractual indemnity for intentional torts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can employer create common-law negligence liability by contract for same injury as workers' comp? | SunPower argued contract created independent role for employer | BJ’s argued § 5 bars any such imposed liability | Employer may not create negligence liability by contract for same injury |
| Can employer contractually indemnify for intentional torts? | SunPower argued contract covered intentional torts | BJ’s argued exclusive remedy bars indemnity, no exception | Indemnity for intentional torts not barred by exclusive remedy provision |
| Does § 5 allow claims for indemnity as third-party beneficiary? | SunPower claimed beneficiary status entitled it to indemnity | BJ’s argued exclusive remedy precluded such claims | Contractual indemnity valid only for intentional torts, not negligence |
| Is SunPower’s claim for contribution valid? | SunPower argued for contribution as alleged liable party | BJ’s argued it was not a joint tortfeasor post-comp award | No right of contribution for same physical injury already compensated |
Key Cases Cited
- Farley v. City of Claremore, 465 P.3d 1213 (Okla. 2020) (workers’ compensation award precludes negligence and intentional tort claims for same injury unless properly pled)
- Odom v. Penske Truck Leasing Co., 415 P.3d 521 (Okla. 2018) (dual-capacity doctrine abrogated by Oklahoma statute; employer’s liability is exclusive under workers’ compensation law)
- Dyke v. Saint Francis Hosp. Inc., 861 P.2d 295 (Okla. 1993) (explaining the dual-capacity doctrine)
- Gowens v. Barstow, 364 P.3d 644 (Okla. 2015) (comparative fault and apportionment principles in Oklahoma tort cases)
- Harter Concrete Products, Inc. v. Harris, 592 P.2d 526 (Okla. 1979) (nature of workers' compensation as exclusive statutory substitute for common-law negligence)