418 P.3d 698
Okla.2018Background
- Decedent was hired by Barnes Tag Agency, Inc. (BTA) to perform maintenance on property owned individually by Jim T. Roy Barnes (Barnes), the corporation's sole shareholder; Decedent died after an explosion on Barnes' property.
- The Workers' Compensation Court of Existing Claims (WCC) found Decedent was an employee of BTA, awarded death benefits to minor children, and expressly determined Decedent was not an employee of Barnes; that WCC order was not appealed.
- Lind (administrator and daughter) sued Barnes individually in district court for wrongful death based on Barnes' ownership/maintenance duties as the landowner.
- The district court granted summary judgment for BTA and Barnes, holding the Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Act (OWCA) exclusive remedy barred Lind's tort claim; the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed in relevant part.
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari and held Barnes was not an OWCA employee, and that under the OWCA as it stood at the time of injury, a sole shareholder-landowner is not automatically immune from suit for independent torts arising from property ownership.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Barnes was Decedent's co-employee under OWCA § 3 | Lind: Barnes was not an employer; plaintiff treated Barnes as a separate third party | Barnes: claimed co-employee or otherwise immune via corporate/shareholder status | Court: Barnes was not a co-employee; WCC finding that Barnes was not employer is dispositive |
| Whether OWCA exclusive remedy (85 O.S. Supp. 2006 § 12) bars suit against Barnes individually for negligence as landowner | Lind: OWCA does not bar tort claims against non-employer third parties for independent torts | Barnes: as sole shareholder/owner, Barnes is entitled to immunity comparable to employer under OWCA | Court: Under the OWCA versions applicable at the time, no express immunity barred suit against a stockholder sued for independent torts as a third-party landowner; suit may proceed |
| Whether OWCA § 44 (claims against third persons) prevents district court tort action after worker elected/received benefits | Lind: suit permissible because Barnes was a separate legal person and not Decedent's employer | Barnes: receipt of workers' comp and corporate relationship preclude separate tort suit | Court: § 44 did not preclude this third-party suit where the defendant was a distinct non-employer landowner |
| Effect of later AWCA (85A) amendments adding stockholder immunity | Lind: not retroactive to bar the suit under the older OWCA; even under AWCA, immunity limited | Barnes: AWCA codified longstanding immunity for shareholders and validates dismissal | Court: AWCA later added broader immunity for stockholders, showing Legislature intended a change; but AWCA interpretation in Odom limits immunity to stockholders acting in role of employer — not dispositive here |
Key Cases Cited
- Odom v. Penske Truck Leasing Co., 415 P.3d 521 (Okla. 2018) (interpreting AWCA § 5(A) and holding stockholder immunity is limited to conduct in role of employer)
- Kenkel v. Parker, 362 P.3d 1145 (Okla. 2015) (corporate-law principles bar holding shareholders liable for employer's failure to secure workers' compensation coverage)
- Lyon v. Barrett, 445 A.2d 1153 (N.J. 1982) (sole owner of a corporation remains potentially liable in tort as landlord; corporate immunity does not extend to owner for independent torts)
- LaBelle v. Crepeau, 593 A.2d 653 (Me. 1991) (shareholder can be sued individually for premises liability where sued in capacity as landowner, not as employer)
- Couillard v. Van Ess, 447 N.W.2d 391 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989) (legal distinction between corporation and owners eliminates owners' immunity as individuals for premises-related torts)