SHADID v. K 9 UNIVERSITY LLC
2017 OK CIV APP 45
| Okla. Civ. App. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Christina Shadid, while working for K 9 University, was attacked and injured by a dog owned by defendant Angel Soriano on September 7, 2014.
- Shadid filed and resolved a Workers' Compensation Commission claim by Joint Petition Settlement on November 12, 2015.
- Shadid later sued K 9 University and Soriano in district court (suing Soriano as the dog owner) on September 7, 2016; she voluntarily dismissed the employer (K 9 University) based on workers' compensation exclusivity.
- Soriano moved to dismiss Shadid's suit against him, arguing 85A O.S. § 5 bars district-court tort claims against an employer or related parties even in other capacities.
- The trial court granted dismissal for failure to state a claim; Shadid appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dual-capacity doctrine allows Shadid to sue Soriano in tort despite workers' compensation exclusivity | Shadid: Soriano wore a non-employer persona (dog owner) giving rise to independent tort liability under the dual-capacity doctrine | Soriano: 85A O.S. § 5 makes workers' compensation the exclusive remedy against employers and related persons regardless of other capacities | The court held § 5 abrogates the dual-capacity doctrine; exclusivity bars Shadid’s district-court tort claim against Soriano |
| Standard of review for dismissal for failure to state a claim | Shadid: (implicit) pleadings state a viable claim under dog-bite statute if dual-capacity applies | Soriano: pleadings show exclusivity precludes any district remedy | Court: de novo review; pleadings accepted as true, but statutory exclusivity dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Weber v. Armco, Inc., 663 P.2d 1221 (1983 OK 53) (articulates and limits the dual-capacity doctrine)
- Fanning v. Brown, 85 P.3d 841 (2004 OK 7) (standard for reviewing dismissal for failure to state a claim)
- Welch v. Crow, 206 P.3d 599 (2009 OK 20) (principles of statutory construction; de novo review)
- Frazier v. Bryan Mem. Hosp. Auth., 775 P.2d 281 (1989 OK 73) (pleading standard: cannot dismiss unless no possible set of facts would entitle relief)
- Nickell v. Sumner, 943 P.2d 625 (1997 OK 101) (dog-bite statute attaches liability without fault)