 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
LaDew v. Cundiff11/8/2000
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pocahontas County, Allan L. Goode, Judge.
LaDews appeal from the district court order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants on LaDews' personal injury and loss-of-consortium claims.
AFFIRMED.
A terrible injury at the workplace leaves a man with only one eye. He wants to be paid more than workers' compensation. Plaintiff-appellants, Nathan and Rebecca LaDew, appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment against them in their personal injury and loss-of-consortium claims. They claim the court erred in failing to find genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether gross negligence by defendant co-employees proximately caused their damages.
Background facts:
Nathan LaDew was employed at Iowa Industrial Hydraulics as a tester of hydraulic cylinders. As part of the job , he was required to inspect the cylinders for oil leaks while they were pumped full of oil and pressurized. On February 22, 1996, he was injured when a fitting discharged from the cylinder he was testing and struck him in the face, causing him to lose his left eye. He brought this action under Iowa Code section 85.20 (1995) against several co-employees at the plant, alleging their gross negligence contributed to his injury . LaDew's wife, Rebecca, brought a loss-of-consortium claim.
Summary judgment:
The district court granted the co-employees' motion for summary judgment. The court found there was no evidence to support any of the elements of the LaDews' gross negligence claim, specifically, that the co-employees: (1) had knowledge of the peril to be apprehended; (2) had knowledge that injury was a probable result of the danger; and (3) consciously failed to avoid the peril.
Appellate claims:
The LaDews appeal, contending summary judgment was improper. They point to evidence of other incidents and work-related injuries involving the hydraulic cylinder testing that they contend were similar in nature to LaDew's accident and argue a factual dispute exists as to whether the co-employees had the requisite knowledge. LaDews also claim the co-employees had authority to order placement of safety shields or better training, which would have avoided the accident.
Scope of review:
Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 237(c) provides:
The [summary] judgment sought should be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
On appeal, we review a summary judgment ruling for error. Benavides v. J.C. Penney Life Ins. Co., 539 N.W.2d 352, 354 (Iowa 1995). Summary judgment may be entered if the record shows "no genuine issue as to any material fact and . . . the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Iowa R. Civ. P. 237(c). Thus, "we examine the record before the district court to decide whether a genuine issue of material fact exists and whether the court correctly applied the law." Benavides, 539 N.W.2d at 354. In doing so, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion for summary judgment. Anderson v. Miller, 559 N.W.2d 29, 31 (Iowa 1997); Hagen v. Texaco Refining & Mktg., Inc., 526 N.W.2d 531, 538 (Iowa 1995).
Analysis:
Iowa's Workers' Compensation Statute provides the exclusive remedy for workers injured on the job. The statute protects other employees of the employer from tort claims so long as the injury "is not caused by the
Page 1 2 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|