 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Mann v. Conklin11/21/2005
Relators, the survivors of the decedent Robert Mann ("Mann"), have petitioned this Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Honorable J. Dan Conklin ("Respondent") to reverse his decision dismissing for lack of jurisdiction Robert Glenn ("Defendant") from a lawsuit for damages for the wrongful death of Mann. Defendant is the owner of Robert Glenn Productions, a sole proprietorship, which provides sound, staging, and lighting equipment for area concerts. Robert Glenn Productions owns the sound and lighting equipment and generally transports it to the concert venues using box trucks rented from Ryder Truck Rental. Mann worked with Robert Glenn Productions as a part-time laborer for two years; his duties included loading, transporting, setting up and tearing down the equipment, and operating the trucks as part of his employment.
On May 10, 2003, Mann was driving one of the Ryder trucks loaded with lighting equipment west on I-44; a co-employee, Justin Glenn, rode in the truck with Mann. Defendant drove the other Ryder truck loaded with sound equipment and he, too, had another employee in his cab. While the two vehicles were traveling along the interstate, a collision occurred and Mann was crushed to death in the cab of his Ryder truck. The parties agree that a claim was filed against Robert Glenn Productions with the Division of Workers' Compensation ("the Division") for the wrongful death of Mann and death benefits have been and are continuing to be paid.
Relators also brought a claim in the Circuit Court of Greene County, claiming negligence against Defendant and others for the death of Mann. In response, Defendant moved for summary judgment claiming he was entitled to have the claim dismissed as a co-employee of Mann; he argued the claim should be dismissed because Relators did not show "something more" needed to overcome the exclusive jurisdiction of the Workers' Compensation Law and that he was an employer of Mann. The court granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissed Defendant from the lawsuit. The dismissal order is not found in the record; however, the docket entry states that Respondent dismissed the cause against Defendant for lack of jurisdiction. Relators brought a petition for a writ and a preliminary order in mandamus was issued on April 15, 2005. We find our preliminary writ to have been improvidently granted and hereby quash our preliminary order.
Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the Workers' Compensation Law is applicable, the court shall treat it as a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and shall dismiss the action. State ex rel. J.E. Jones Constr. Co. v. Sanders, 875 S.W.2d 154, 157 (Mo. App. E.D. 1994). Issuing a writ of mandamus falls within the sound discretion of this Court, and even if the trial court misinterpreted its jurisdiction, Relators are not necessarily entitled to its issuance. See State ex rel. Meyer v. Ravenhill, 20 S.W.3d 543, 545 (Mo. App. W.D. 2000). The purpose of a writ of mandamus is to execute a clear, unequivocal, and specific right, and not to adjudicate. State ex rel. Chassaing v. Mummert, 887 S.W.2d 573, 576 (Mo. banc 1994).
Although both parties in this proceeding accept the premise that Defendant was a co-employee of Mann, and not his employer, we find evidence supporting a determination by the trial court that defendant was in fact Mann's employer. The rights of the parties concerning Workers' Compensation claims are controlled by such designations. The statutory definition of "employer" in Missouri's Workers' Compensation Law, under section 287.030.1(1), provides in pertinent part:
Every person, partnership, association
Page 1 2 3 Missouri Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|