 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Oliver v. Stimson Lumber Co.12/22/1999
1999 MT 328 [56 St.Rep. 1303]
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, In and for the County of Missoula, The Honorable Ed McLean, Judge presiding.
Argued and Submitted: June 15, 1999
Byron and Camille Oliver (Olivers) brought an action against Stimson Lumber Company (Stimson) and Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation (Liberty Northwest) for negligent and intentional spoliation of evidence, along with a request to void subrogation rights, in the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and following two separate hearings, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
We restate the issues raised on appeal as follows:
1. Did the District Court err when it concluded that the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act barred the Olivers from bringing a claim for spoliation of evidence against Mr. Oliver's employer?
2. Should Montana adopt the torts of negligent and intentional spoliation of evidence as independent causes of action?
3. Did the District Court err in awarding summary judgment in favor of Liberty Northwest Corporation?
On appeal, the Olivers have not raised the issue of whether Stimson's subrogation rights should be impacted by its conduct and therefore, we will not address the issue in this appeal.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Byron Oliver was employed by Champion International Corporation (Champion) at its Bonner mill from 1974 until the time of its sale to Stimson Lumber Company in November 1993. Following the sale by Champion, Byron continued his employment at the Bonner mill as an employee of Stimson.
On May 9, 1994, Byron Oliver suffered a serious injury as the result of an industrial accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with Stimson. As such, Mr.~Oliver's injury fell within the parameters of the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act, entitling him to benefits.
The Olivers immediately hired an attorney to represent their interests with regard to the work-related injuries sustained by Byron. Shortly thereafter, the Olivers' counsel began investigating the possibility of a third-party action associated with the piece of equipment involved in Mr. Oliver's injury. As part of the investigation, the Olivers' counsel made a request for an inspection of the equipment involved in the injury. Stimson turned to its workers' compensation insurance carrier, Liberty Northwest, for advice regarding this request. A claims adjuster for Liberty Northwest contacted a local attorney, Larry Jones, who had previously represented Liberty Northwest and its insureds, and advised him of the request for an inspection. The claims adjuster requested Jones to be present at the inspection because Stimson personnel wanted Jones to explain the reason for the involvement of an attorney on behalf of the Olivers given that Mr. Oliver's injury was an accepted liability claim under the Workers' Compensation Act.
An inspection of the equipment took place on May 18, 1994. Counsel for the Olivers, the attorney for Liberty Northwest and Stimson, the claims adjuster from Liberty Northwest, a loss prevention employee from Liberty Northwest, and various Stimson employees were present during the inspection. In addition, nearly everyone who participated in the inspection understood that the purpose of this inspection was so that counsel for the Olivers could decide whether there was any basis for a third-party lawsuit. Photographs and a videota
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|