Torts or Crimes, including Negligence

The Texas Star Transportation Negligence Case

The report will center on the topic of negligence when a worker at Texas Star Transportation suffered brain injuries while going about his normal business. The West Star Transportation Inc. v. Charles Robison et al. case illuminates the results that businesses may encounter if they are not protected against carelessness (Lanier, 2014).

Section 1: Case Overview

The first section of the essay will concentrate on the case that the Texas District Court and Texas Appellate Court of Appeals heard. The document will then go over the laws or regulations that the courts used to make their decisions. Additionally, consider how the courts used those guidelines to reach a decision. Finally, the paper will describe conclusion of the Appellate court and the general outcome of the case.

Issue

In April 2007, Mr Robison experienced brain injury when undertaking his daily work at the West Star Transportation. He suffered from serious injury after he fell from a haphazardly loaded flatbed trailer (Harrison, 2015). During this period, West Star Transportation Company was not providing insurance compensation of workers. For this reason, Mr Robison sued the company because of negligence in 2009. Moreover, he asserted that the West Star Company was negligent because it failed to provide a practically safe working environment. Therefore, Mr Robison and his wife were seeking compensation associated to his fall (Tucker, 2015). They petitioned the court to order that the company was liable for negligence for is failure to offer secure working place. Following various legal proceedings that comprised of an unsuccessful settlement agreement, the cause advanced to full trial in a Lubbock Court (Harrison, 2015).

Rules

The Lubbock court made a determination based on the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act during the period of the accident. The legal perspectives of negligence suggest careless or heedless of conduct which leads to damage, sustained by an individual to whom the owed duty. The determination of the cases was based on important elements of negligence such as duty of care (Tucker, 2015). Precisely, a person who caused injuries to another person who suffered from these injuries possesses duty of care. In addition, when the duty of care is not preserved and maintained it causes breach subsequently leading to worker’s injuries (Harrison, 2015).

The law implied that The West Star Company hold the duty of care. Therefore, Mr Robison was supposed to prove the presence of duty of care the court against the company that cause his brain injury (Lanier, 2014). In addition, the jury relied on the factor of causation, which is important element under the law. In this regard, the plaintiff pointed out that the brain injury he sustained was caused by the company and its breach of duty (Tucker, 2015). The company had to initiate various mechanisms to protect or insure the person against harm.

Analysis

The Texas Workers’ Compensation Act was used by Texas courts to make their decisions. In Texas, companies may decide to leave the employees compensation program of the state. A few states in the country – Texas included, provide this alternative. Non-subscribers deal with their own workers injury claims via a worker benefit plan sponsored by a company. In addition, after the rates of compensation increased, the number of non-subscribers rose (Harrison, 2015). West Star company was one of the non-subscribers hence it had no protection of causative negligence, negligence or risk assumption. Based on the legal provisions, the company only defence in the case was to demonstrate that it was not negligent, and hence not liable for the cause of injuries sustained by Mr Robison. In addition, it attempted to argue that the complainant was guilty of part of negligence act (Lanier, 2014). West Star Company reasoned that since Mr Robison was an expert with long experience in the operation of flatbed, he did not need a supervise, train or duty to warn (Tucker, 2015).

Conclusion

The Texas District Court found out that West Star Transportation Company was liable for negligence, which led to Mr Robison’s head injuries. Consequently, the plaintiff was awarded $5.3 million as a compensation for the accident. The amount covered for physical impairment, loss of working ability, loss of association, mental anguish, and medical care (Harrison, 2015).

The business organization appealed the lower court’s verdict suggested that the negligence judgment was incorrect since the jury was furnished with a negligence definition that was very wide, including other arguments (Tucker, 2015). Moreover, the firm implied that evidence in the case was factually a legally inadequate to sustain the conclusion of the jury that the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the negligence of West Star.

The three-judge bench of Appellate court in Texas solidly upheld the decision of the district court. In its verdict, the panel said that the only defence that the company could have used in this case was to demonstrate that it was not liable for negligence that led to employee’s injuries (Harrison, 2015). Alternatively, it ought to have shown that Mr Robison was guilty of an action that was the only source of his accident. The court established adequate evidence in the incident to demonstrate the negligence of the company. In fact, the firm created an abnormally precarious work place and an irrational risk of injury to its workers. For this reason, the risky working environment was the main reason why Robison fell and was hurt. Furthermore, the court also maintained that there was sufficient evidence to justify an award of $5.3 million to Mr and Mrs Robison (Lanier, 2014).

References

Harrison, S. (2015). Worker keeps big negligence award in Texas comp case - Business Insurance. Business Insurance. Retrieved 14 June 2017, from http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20150127/NEWS08/150129856/Texas-worker-can-keep-million-dollar-liability-award,-appeals-court-rules

Lanier, M. (2014). Injured Worker Wins $5.5 Million Texas Verdict. Lanierlawfirm.com. Retrieved 14 June 2017, from https://lanierlawfirm.com/law-firm-news/injured-worker-wins-texas-verdict.htm

Tucker, S. (2015). Texas Affirms $5.2 Million Brain Injury Verdict Against Trucking Company. The National Trial Lawyers. Retrieved 14 June 2017, from http://www.thenationaltriallawyers.org/2015/02/brain-injury-verdict-affirmed/