A recent dismissal in the U.S. Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania shows that the Worker’s Compensation Act is still an excellent shield for employers and their insurers in defending personal injury and wrongful death claims against employers.

In Segui v. CSC Sugar, the decedent died from suffocation after falling into an industrial hopper full of raw sugar.  The widow sued the decedent’s employer.  The defendant moved to dismiss based on the Pennsylvania Worker’s Compensation Bar against suing an employer.  The widow argued that an exception for an intentional tort under the New Jersey’s Worker’s Compensation Act should apply.  The widow claimed that the employer removed a safety grate on the industrial hopper (apparently due to frequent clogging), which may have prevented her deceased husband from falling into the machine. The court was unpersuaded in light of the employer’s argument that the widow could not prove that the employer deliberately deceived its employees and created a condition that it knew, with substantial certainty, could result in injury or death.  Accordingly, under either the Pennsylvania or New Jersey Worker’s Compensation Act, the widow’s cause of action against the employer was barred.

This case demonstrates the breadth of immunity that the WCA affords employers and their insurers in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Generally, the WCA’s exceptions are narrowly construed, notwithstanding plaintiffs attempts to chip away at the WCA’s broad reach.

Thanks to Rachel Freedman for her contribution to this post.