Eric Gardner was employed by DelVal Staffing Agency, which assigned him to work as a food packer at MIA Products Company. Gardner encountered a slippery spot while removing food from a freezer and fell, sustaining injuries. Gardner received workers’ compensation benefits from DelVal and also filed a negligence lawsuit against MIA. MIA argued that Gardner’s lawsuit was barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act, which prohibits an employee from suing his “employer” for damages, and limits his recovery to medical and wage loss benefits. While Gardner was formally employed by DelVal, MIA argued that it was the functional equivalent of an “employer”. MIA contended that it controlled the work done by Gardner, as well as the manner in which he performed it. If Gardner could be proven to be a “borrowed employee” of MIA, then his lawsuit against MIA would be barred under the Act.
The trial court dismissed Gardner’s lawsuit, but the Superior Court reversed, finding there to be unanswered factual questions as to which entity controlled Gardner’s work. Gardner testified that a DelVal representative accompanied him to the job site, instructed him on how to perform his job duties, and conducted walk-through inspections throughout the day. If it was DelVal – rather than MIA – that predominately controlled Gardner’s work, then Gardner would be entitled to proceed with his lawsuit against MIA. The case was remanded for a trial on the issue of control.
The attorneys of Supinka & Supinka PC, are experienced in handling all types of injury claims. For more information and a consultation, please call Supinka & Supinka, PC at (724) 349-6768.
