DALLAS - The Texas Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar a claim made by a woman who sued Murphy Oil USA after she tripped and fell in the parking lot while on her way to work, according to the 5th Court of Appeals.
Court records show Donnetta Stegall initially sued Wal-Mart Stores but later added Murphy Oil as a defendant.
According to the 5th Court’s Feb. 22 opinion, Stegall worked as a cashier at Murphy Oil. On Sept. 25, 2017, her aunt drove her to work and dropped her off in the store’s parking lot, approximately ten minutes before her afternoon shift was scheduled to start. On her way across the parking lot, she stepped in a pothole, fell, and seriously injured her ankle, incurring almost $13,000 in medical bills for treatment of her injuries.
Soon after the accident, Stegall initiated a workers’ compensation claim, but did not send the insurer information necessary to evaluate the claim, and it was denied.
Around one year after being named as a defendant, Murphy Oil moved for summary judgment, contending that the exclusive remedy provision of the TWCA precluded Stegall’s common law claim, the opinion states.
In her response, Stegall argued that she was not in the course and scope of her employment when she was injured, so the TWCA did not apply.
The trial court denied the motion and Murphy Oil appealed, contending that the trial court erred.
According to the opinion, Murphy Oil argued that Stegall was in the course and scope of her employment because she was on her way to work, traveling across her employer’s parking lot.
“Indeed, the TWCA states specifically that ‘course and scope’ does not include ‘transportation to and from the place of employment’ with limited exceptions that all agree do not apply here,” the opinion states. “Murphy Oil relies upon the access doctrine, a common law exception to the going-to-and-from-work exclusion.”
The 5th Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling, concluding that the access doctrine exception does not apply to this case.
“Stegall was traveling to work when she was injured; she was not in the course and scope of her employment at that time,” the opinion states. “Because her injury was not work-related, the exclusive remedy provision of the TWCA does not apply in this case.
“The trial court did not err in denying Murphy Oil’s motion for judgment as a matter of law.”
Case No. 05-21-00644-CV