Insurance Dispute Lawyer Blog
Nurses fighting one another may sound like a scene from daytime television, but unfortunately, this also occurs in real time. When one employee attacks a supervisor, can a supervisor proceed with a lawsuit against the employer? A nursing home in Laplace, Louisiana, recently tried to be dismissed from a personal injury lawsuit regarding two of its employees, stating it could not be vicariously liable. The Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal judged this was a question for trial.
Two employees of Twin Oaks Nursing Home, Inc. (“Twin Oaks”) in the parish of St. John the Baptist were involved in an altercation in April 2012. A supervisor, Ms. Haynie, approached her employee, Ms. Alford, requesting that Ms. Alford report to her office. When Ms. Haynie turned to walk away, Ms. Alford struck her supervisor repeatedly in the head and neck from behind. Ms. Haynie sustained bruises, scratches, a black eye, and soft tissue damage. Ms. Alford had numerous prior work violations and justified the attack by stating she wanted Twin Oaks to give her a reason to fire her.
Ms. Haynie filed a lawsuit against Ms. Alford and Twin Oaks in the Fortieth Judicial District Court Parish of St. John the Baptist. The District Court dismissed the lawsuit against Twin Oaks, stating that the nursing home could not be vicariously liable because Ms. Alford’s actions were not employment-rooted or incidental to employee performance.
The Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal disagreed. An employer may be held liable for an employee’s tortious act if the tortious act was primarily employment-rooted and incidental to the performance of the employee’s duties while occurring on the employer’s premises and during the hours of employment. See LaBrane v. Lewis, 292 So.2d.216 (La. 1974). An employer is not liable merely because an act happened on the employer’s premises during working hours.
Vicarious liability will be found only when the employee is acting within the scope and in furtherance of their employment duties. See Baumeister v. Plunkett, 673 So.2d 994 (La. 1996). However, the Fifth Circuit did note that not every factor above must be met, and each case’s particular set of facts should be carefully analyzed for employer liability.
The Fifth Circuit determined that Ms. Haynie presented enough material facts regarding employer liability that should be presented at a trial. Thus, it was inappropriate for the District Court to dismiss Twin Oaks. On the date of the altercation, Ms. Haynie was at the nursing home performing her duties. Ms. Alford stated the attack was partly provoked by her assumption that she would soon be fired, which suggests it was employment-rooted. Other facts indicated that the conflict between the two women was purely personal. Either way, enough facts required a trial to determine whether liability for the injuries could be passed to Twin Oaks.
Vicarious liability can be tricky territory to tread without an excellent and skilled lawyer, no matter which side of the aisle you find yourself on. It is vital that anyone caught up in a dispute involving employer liability seek appropriate legal advice.
Additional Sources: Demetris Haynie and Curtis Young Sr. Versus Twin Oaks Nursing Home, Inc. and Annie Alford
Additional Berniard Law Firm Articles on Employer Vicarious Liability: Court of Appeals Examines the Scope of Employment Requirement for Vicarious Liability