The Oregon Court of Appeals on Thursday overturned a jury’s $10 million verdict in favor of a worker’s widow for his asbestos exposures, ruling that the case lacked proof regarding the company’s workers compensation insurance coverage at the time.
Reberiano Gonzalez Ibarra fell ill due to his exposure to asbestos on the job in the 1970s and sued his former employer, C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman Inc., with his wife filing a claim for loss of consortium. Mr. Ibarra died while the case was pending and his widow took over his claims as the representative of his estate, according to Ibarra v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman Inc.
The employer raised the exclusive remedy provision of the California Labor Code as a defense, yet the widow argued that the employer failed to secure coverage because it had not complied with certain statutory requirements for self-insurance — specifically, the filing of annual reports and the maintenance of a security deposit for accrued liabilities — and that the employer had the burden of establishing the applicability of the exclusive remedy rule, which provides an affirmative defense.
A trial judge agreed with the widow and rejected the employer’s exclusivity defense. The case went to trial, and a jury awarded the widow $10 million in damages.
The Oregon Court of Appeal reversed and remanding the case, saying the widow had the burden of establishing that the exclusive remedy rule did not apply. Though a defendant generally has to plead and prove affirmative defenses, the court said there is an exception to this general rule in the situation where the complaint affirmatively alleges facts indicating coverage by the workers compensation system.
The court also said the evidence did not establish that the defendant failed to secure coverage for Mr. Ibarra, and that the absence of evidence regarding the employer’s conduct after it stopped being self-insured did not carry the widow’s burden of proof given that the employer alleged that it had been meeting its statutory obligations at the time of Mr. Ibarra’s injury, even if there was no direct evidence of this.
WorkCompCentral is a sister publication of Business Insurance. More stories here.
