In SeaBright Insurance Co. v. US Airways, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that an employee of an independent contractor who was injured in the workplace could not sue the party that hired the contractor company to do the work, even when this party failed to comply with workplace safety requirements.

US Airways uses a conveyor to move luggage at San Francisco International Airport. The airport is the actual owner of the conveyor, but US Airways uses it under a permit and has responsibility for its maintenance. US Airways hired independent contractor Lloyd W. Aubry Co. to maintain and repair the conveyor; the airline neither directed nor had its employees participate in Aubry‘s work. The conveyor lacked certain safety guards required by applicable regulations.  Anthony Verdon Lujan was inspecting the conveyor as an employee of Aubry, and his arm got caught in its moving parts. Plaintiff SeaBright Insurance Company, Aubry‘s workers‘ compensation insurer, paid Lujan benefits  based on the injury and then sued US Airways, claiming the airline caused his injury and seeking to recover what it paid in benefits. Lujan intervened as a plaintiff in the action, alleging causes of action for negligence and premises liability.

US Airways sought summary judgment based on Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 689 (1993) and Hooker v. Department of Transportation, 27 Cal.4th 198 (2002), two previous California Supreme Court decisions. Privette stands for the proposition that generally when employees of independent contractors are injured in the workplace, they cannot sue the party that hired the contractor to do the work. In Hooker, the Supreme Court held that the hirer of an independent contractor can be liable for a workplace injury of the contractor‘s employee if the hirer retained control over the contractor‘s work and exercised that control in a way hat affirmatively contributed to the employee‘s workplace injury.

Here, the trial court held that US Airways did not affirmatively contribute to the injury and thus summary judgment was proper. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding that under Cal-OSHA US Airways had a non-delegableduty to ensure that the conveyor had safety guards, and that the question whether the airline‘s failure to perform this duty affirmatively contributed to plaintiff’s injury remained a triable issue of fact, precluding summary judgment. The Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and held that an independent contractor‘s hirer implicitly delegates to that contractor its tort law duty, if any, to provide the employees of that contractor a safe workplace.  It then held the duty was permitted to be delegated under the law.  As such, US Airways could not be held liable.

For more information, or if you need legal assistance, please contact the Wagner Legal Group, P.C. at (310) 857-5293 or fill out our contact form on the website.