Opinion
CIVIL ACTION No. 04-0010 SECTION "K"(1)
March 9, 2004
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 5) filed by defendant Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation ("Kaiser"). Plaintiffs have not filed an opposition with the Court. Having reviewed the pleadings, memorandum, and relevant law, the Court GRANTS defendant's unopposed motion as meritorious.
The instant lawsuit arises out of an accident in which plaintiff Terry Hollowell fell approximately forty (40) feet from atop the #1 tertiary tray at Kaiser's facility in Gramercy, Louisiana. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was working directly for Kaiser as a maintenance repairer. After the accident, plaintiff applied for and received workers' compensation benefits. Kaiser has paid for plaintiffs medical expenses.
There is no dispute that plaintiff Hollowell was a direct employee of defendant Kaiser at the time of the accident and that he was in the course and scope of his employment at that time. Thus, he was statutorily barred from filing an action in tort, such as this one, by the Louisiana Workers' Compensation Act, La.Rev.Stat. 23:1031, et seq. Louisiana Revised Statute 23:1032 provides in pertinent part:
Except for intentional acts provided for in Subsection B, the rights and remedies herein granted to an employee or his dependent on account of an injury, or compensable sickness or disease for which he is entitled to compensation under this Chapter, shall be exclusive of all other rights, remedies, and claims for damages, including but not limited to punitive or exemplary damages, unless such rights, remedies, and damages are created by a statute, whether now existing or created in the future, expressly establishing same as available to such employee, his personal representatives, dependents, or relations, as against his employer, or any principal or any officer, director, stockholder, partner, or employee of such employer or principal, for said injury, or compensable sickness or disease.
La.Rev.Stat. 23:1032(A)(1)(a). In Reeves v. Structural Preservation Systems, 98-1795 (La. 3/12/99), 731 So.2d 208, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that "the words 'intentional act' mean the same as 'intentional tort' in reference to civil liability." Id. at 211.
In the case at bar, plaintiffs have not alleged any facts supporting an intentional tort claim. Plaintiffs' blanket allegations that Hollowell's injuries were "substantially certain" to follow from Kaiser's actions are insufficient. See Kullman v. MCL Services, Inc., 1995 WL 10819, *3 (E.D. La. 1995). Therefore, there being no opposition, defendant's motion seems to have merit. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 5) is hereby DENIED.