Supreme Court Concludes There is no Common Law Wrongful Discharge Action Under Iowa's Drug Testing Statute

Iowa's drug testing statute, section 730.5, provides a statutory remedy for wrongful discharge.  In Ferguson v. Exide Technologies, No. 18-1600 (Iowa Dec. 13, 2019), the Supreme Court concluded that an action for common law tort was not available and that the statutory remedy precluded common law recovery.  The court also found that attorney's fees were available under section 730.5.

Plaintiff suffered injuries to her elbows as a result of her work with Exide.  When she reported the injury, she was informed that she had to submit to a drug and alcohol test under the employer's policy.  She refused to take the test and was fired for her refusal.  Plaintiff sued under 730.5 and also asserted a wrongful discharge tort.  The employer admitted to the statutory violation and a jury trial on damages, which was only allowed in the common law action, resulted in an award to plaintiff for lost wages and benefits and for emotional distress.  Plaintiff was also awarded attorney's fees.

On review, the Supreme Court noted earlier cases addressing common law actions for a wrongful termination tort were generally not permissible where the "legislature has weighed in on the issue and established the parameters of the governing public policy."  The court reviewed earlier cases involving common law actions in the context of statutory remedies.  The court found that where the legislature had provided a remedy for wrongful discharge in such a situation, no common law action was available.  the court found that "when the legislature includes a right to civil enforcement in the very statute that contains the public policy a common law claim would protect, the common law claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy becomes unnecessary."

The court affirmed the award of attorney's fees, finding that the timesheets produced by plaintiff's attorneys had excluded the time they spent on the common law claim.  Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, the attorney's fee award was affirmed.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Court of Appeals Affirms Denial of Workers' Compensation Benefits; Rules on Credit Issue

Thomas v. Archer Daniels Midland Company , No. 23-0323 (Iowa App. Nov. 8, 2023) Claimant initial suffered a compensable injury to his right eye in 2017.  He subsequently sustained several injuries in 2018 while stepping off a pontoon boat, which he attributed to a lack of depth perception as a result of his eye issues.  The deputy ruled in favor of claimant, but the commissioner reversed, finding that the 2018 injuries were not a sequelae of the original eye injuries.   The Court of Appeals concluded that the decision of the commissioner was supported by substantial evidence and affirmed the decision of the commissioner.  The Court noted that medical causation was a question of fact vested in the commissioner's discretion and noted that although claiant speculated that his fall was caused by his right eye injuries, claimant could not specifically recall what happened and there were no witnesses to provide context.  The speculation of medical experts that vision loss caused the fall
Read more

2021 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions

  2021 Workers' Compensation Appeals Decisions The following are appeal decisions decided by the commissioner in 2021, by month. December 2021 Carmer v. Nordstrom , No. 1656062.01 (App. Dec. 29, 2021) - Claimant was found to have sustained an injury to her right shoulder and a sequela injury to her left shoulder.  Both of these injuries were found to be scheduled member injuries, but the injuries were found to be industrially compensable under 85.34(2)(v). Claimant was found to have a 70% industrial disability (Palmer). On appeal, the commissioner affirms that there was a sequela injury to the left shoulder, crediting Dr. Segal's report over that of Dr. Milani.  Most importantly, the commissioner affirms the fact that because the two shoulder injuries were the result of a single incident, this injury was to be treated industrially under 85.34(2)(v).  The commissioner notes that "shoulder" injuries were not added to the list of injuries that were to be treated a schedu
Read more

2024 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions

  2024 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions May 2024  Roth v. General Millls, Inc. , No. 1657652.01 (App. May 3, 2024) - Claimant was found to have sustained an injury to the shoulder, but the injury was found not to have extended to the body. Claimant was found eligible for 24 weeks of permanency benefits.  Unauthorized medical care received by claimant was denied (Phillips). On appeal the commissioner affirmed the decision of the deputy without additional analysis. 4 months from arbitration to appeal decision. April 2024 Poe v. Capital Express, Inc. and SIF , No. 22004117.01 (App. April 30, 2024) - In this action, claimant was found to have sustained a 6% injury to the leg and was awarded healing period benefits from April 4, 2022 through August 21, 2002.  A 50% penalty was awarded on all accrued weekly benefits for an unreasonable delay in payment without conveying the reason for the delay (Walsh).  Fund benefits were also awarded, but were not a part of the appeal.  The emplo
Read more