Workers Comp

Court remands injury case, lacking evidence of employer liability

Danielle Ling

April 14, 2022 Reprints

Claims Disputes Claims Management Workers Comp Coverage Workplace Safety More + Less -

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania on Monday ordered to vacate a trial court’s order ruling in favor of appellees EQT Production Co. and Halliburton Energy Services Inc. and remanded the workplace injury case.

In 2012, appellant Eric Dobransky sustained injuries from exposure to barite at Scott's Run, a natural-gas well site leased and operated by EQT. In order to drill and produce natural gas at Scott's Run, EQT subcontracted with numerous companies, including HESI, which provided EQT with mud services, according to court documents in Dobransky v. EQT Production Company.

While HESI took on the ultimate responsibility for ensuring a regular and steady supply of barite at Scott’s Run, it elected to subcontract the transportation of the materials to the well site into the care of Northwest Concrete Products, Inc. Northwest employed Mr. Dobransky as a truck driver.

On the day in question, Mr. Dobransky was delivering barite to the Scott's Run site. When unloading the barite into HESI's storage tank, the cap blew off, releasing barite onto Mr. Dobransky’s face and body, documents state.

Mr. Dobransky claims that, among other deficiencies, the tank was missing a ball valve and pressure gauge. As a result of his exposure to the barite, Mr. Dobransky alleges he sustained severe and serious injuries, including losing nearly half of his lung capacity.

Mr. Dobransky subsequently filed a negligence action against the appellees. On July 2, 2018, EQT and HESI filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing they were Mr. Dobransky's statutory employers and therefore immune from tort liability.

The matter before the court concerned whether HESI and, by extension, EQT qualify as statutory employers under the Workers Compensation Act, and, as such, enjoy immunity from tort liability for injuries suffered by Mr. Dobransky.

The Superior Court concluded that HESI and therefore EQT have not indisputably demonstrated that they qualify as Mr. Dobransky's statutory employers, and therefore vacated the trial court's order granting summary judgment in the appellees' favor and remand for further proceedings.