Tomorrow is our last
employment law class. We will discuss a case where a manager ordered an
employee to use a table saw that had been idled due to a broken safety guard. Under the threat of being fired, the employee
worked on the saw. He lost several fingers in an accident—and he sued for what
are called tort damages. His theory? This wasn’t an accident. The employer’s
reckless behavior caused it. It was an intentional injury. He won.
That was a 40 years ago.
This week, Oklahoma had a similar
case. Meet James Todd Beason. He was working in the oil fields when an 80-foot
arm of a crane crashed down on him. He lost his left arm. That was terrible.
But worse was his uncontrollable nerve damage, which he says is “like a
thunderstorm going through my body 24 hours a day.”
This pain has completely
upended his life. He cannot make plans for the simplest of occasions—going to
church, being with family, enjoying basic functions in life. Pain is his
master.
Tort law provides a
remedy for this loss of enjoyment of life. It’s called “noneconomic damages.”
Oklahoma lawmakers passed a GOP bill that limited these damages to $350,000 for
life.
Beason’s attorney, Luke Abel,
correctly explains that caps on noneconomic damages have the most impact on
people who can’t claim an economic loss— retirees, stay-at-home moms, and children.
Mrs. Beason received a $6 million judgment due to the damage inflicted on her
marriage by the carelessness of the company that severely injured her husband.
Last week, the Oklahoma Supreme
Court ruled that the cap on damages was unconstitutional: pain and suffering damages
are as real as economic damages. GOP lawmakers vow to overturn the ruling
No comments:
Post a Comment