Worker’s First Time on Conveyor Belt Results in Severed Finger, but No Cause for Tort Claim

Case File

When a worker received workers' compensation benefits while off of work, it cut against his case that he didn't make an informed election of benefits after losing a finger in an accident at work. Simply Research subscribers have access to the full text of the decision.

Case

Medrano v. Kerry Ingredients & Flavours, Inc., No. 02-24-00262-CV (Tex. Ct. App. 01/09/25).

What Happened

A worker for a manufacturer was asked by his supervisor to work a conveyor belt for the first time. When he did so, his right hand became caught in the belt his ring finger was severed. Because of the accident, the work lost his right ring finger.

The worker brought a negligence claim against the manufacturer, arguing that the manufacturer was liable for "intentional, willful, and wanton failure to disclose" dangers associated with the machinery that severed the worker's finger.

The manufacturer countered by arguing that the election-of-remedies doctrine barred the worker from suing in tort.

The trial court agreed with the manufacturer and granted its motion for summary judgment. The worker appealed to the next level in court, arguing that his election of workers' compensation benefits was not made as "the result of an informed choice."

Rule of Law

The Texas Labor Code provides that recovery of workers' compensation benefits is the “exclusive remedy of an employee covered by workers' compensation insurance coverage or a legal beneficiary against the employer ... for the death of or a work-related injury sustained by the employee.” To enjoy this liability protection, an employer must show that it was explicitly covered for workers' compensation at the time of the employee's injury. 

If an employee opts to receive workers' compensation benefits for an injury sustained in the scope of his employment, the employee may be considered to have made an election of remedies and is, therefore, barred from seeking damages for an intentional tort from his employer.

The Texas election doctrine may constitute a bar to relief when:

(1) An employee successfully exercises an informed choice.

(2) That choice is between two or more remedies, rights, or states of facts.

(3) The choices are inconsistent.

(4) The incontinency constitutes manifest injustice.

What the Appellate Court Said

According to the court, the worker made an informed choice for the following reasons:

(1) The worker was off of work for about a month, and in that month, he received weekly workers' compensation benefits.

(2) The worker testified that during his month off of work, he received temporary income benefits.

(3) The worker was represented by counsel continuously for more than five years.

(4) The worker signed the "Texas Workers' Compensation Work Status Report."

(5) The worker testified that he applied for and received all of his workers' compensation benefits.

(6) The worker never filed a request for a hearing to dispute the benefits he received.

(7) The worker never contacted the manufacturer or the insurance company to say that he did not want workers' compensation benefits.

Thus, the appellate court upheld the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the manufacturer.

Takeaway

Evidence that a Texas worker made an informed election to collect workers' compensation will mean that the worker cannot later bring a tort claim against the employer.

Share This Article: