Ferrell v. Waste Management Disposal Services of Colorado, Inc.

Background

Dwight Emery Esquibel, an employee of Waste Management Disposal Services of Colorado, Inc. (WM Colorado), was operating a front loader at a transfer station in St. Paul, Minnesota, on November 2, 2020. Cortney Ferrell, an employee of Advanced Disposal Services Vasko Solid Waste, Inc. (ADS Vasko), had stepped out of a truck to unchain and open its back gate when Esquibel struck Ferrell while backing out of a trash pile. Ferrell later died from the injuries.

Emma Ferrell, trustee for the next of kin of Cortney Ferrell, sued Esquibel and WM Colorado. She alleged that Esquibel was negligent and that WM Colorado was vicariously liable because Esquibel was acting within the course and scope of his employment. The defendants removed the case from Minnesota state court to federal court and moved for summary judgment on the negligence claims.

Defendants’ Argument

The defendants argued that the election-of-remedies provision of the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act barred Plaintiff’s claims. The parties agreed that Plaintiff had elected to receive workers’ compensation benefits from ADS Vasko and that both ADS Vasko and WM Colorado had the required workers’ compensation insurance.

Under the statute, however, the election barred recovery against a third party only if that third party and the injured worker’s employer were engaged in a “common enterprise.” Minnesota law requires the party asserting that defense to establish three elements: the employers were engaged on the same project, their employees were engaged in a common activity, and the employees faced the same or similar hazards.

Court’s Analysis

The court focused on the common-activity element, which considers the types of work performed, whether the work was interdependent, and whether it was closely coordinated. Esquibel operated a front loader to load transfer trailers, while Ferrell drove a roll-off truck, delivered demolition materials, unloaded them, and then left. The record did not establish that Esquibel loaded or unloaded Ferrell’s truck, that Ferrell loaded transfer trailers or operated a front loader, or that the materials handled by the two employees were the same.

The court also found factual disputes about whether the employees’ work was interdependent. Esquibel’s loading work could have occurred while Ferrell was absent or at a different part of the tipping floor. The evidence of coordination consisted mainly of Esquibel’s statement that he and an ADS Vasko employee communicated by eye contact or radio. The court found that this testimony did not show what they communicated about, whether the communication was necessary, or whether they were coordinating their roles. Esquibel testified that no one directed him, while an ADS Vasko employee directed Ferrell and the roll-off trucks.

The court noted additional concerns about whether the employers were engaged on the same project and whether the employees faced the same or similar hazards, but it did not need to decide those issues because the disputed common-activity element alone prevented summary judgment.

Disposition

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The order did not resolve whether Esquibel was negligent or whether WM Colorado was vicariously liable. It held that the record contained genuine factual disputes and that the defendants had not established, as a matter of law, that the common-enterprise defense barred Plaintiff’s claims.