An example of how labor law protects the negligent employer

[swingline]

Watched the Steve Lehto video and kind of don’t understand the confusion or uncertainty of what is happening. Yes, it seems unfair to the vehicle owner but it’s pretty clear what is going on. It’s well known that if a worker is killed on the job, the liability of his/her employer is limited by the worker’s comp. statute in the particular state. Under worker’s comp, the employer can’t be sued by the employee although I think that most states have exceptions to the liability limitations for intentional conduct or “gross” negligence. But just because this is a workers comp situation doesn’t mean that the decedent’s family can’t look elsewhere for someone responsible under the law for their loved one’s death. In Michigan, as Mr. Lehto stated, that additional responsibility is found in the law governing automobile owner liability. I think that the general rule is that if someone is using your vehicle with your permission, you are responsible for any damage caused by the operation of your vehicle. This kind of liability is one of many reasons why Michigan residents should have automobile insurance. But why would owner liability be the end of the lawsuit story? Workers comp shields the employer from a lawsuit by the employee, but does it shield the employer from a lawsuit by the vehicle owner? Any workers comp attorneys out there know the answer? Mr. Lehto doesn’t even discuss this obvious possibility. If I lend you my car and you run over grandma crossing the street, I’m liable to grandma because I’m the owner but I can still sue you for your negligence that caused my damages [i.e. the money I have to pay to grandma]. Seems like the same should hold true in this case for the vehicle owner suing the dealership.

[Rocket]

^ I presume when the articles say "Suing the owner", what they mean is, the attorney for the deceased is suing the owner's insurance company.

If it ends up being compensable, the insurance company will issue a check, and the matter will be over. The vehicle owner's premiums wouldn't even go up as he's not at fault in an accident.

Would the insurance company then go after the dealership? Who knows. I kind of doubt it.

It would be an uphill battle to prove negligence on the dealer's part just because they hired a 19 year old to change oil.

[Henry Whalley]

...Workers comp shields the employer from a lawsuit by the employee, but does it shield the employer from a lawsuit by the vehicle owner?

No, it doesn't. Neither does it shield the dealership from prosecution for criminal negligence.