This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case concerns the wrongful death of an employee of a Native American casino. The employee consumed alcohol with his supervisor and a co-worker during work hours. After clocking out, he stayed to discuss a potential promotion, then left the premises and died in a car accident. His parents filed claims for wrongful death and loss of consortium, alleging negligence by the casino and its manager (paras 2-3).
Procedural History
- Workers’ Compensation Administration, 2004: The mediator concluded that the employee’s death did not occur within the course and scope of his employment, barring workers’ compensation benefits under the “going and coming” rule (para 4).
- District Court of Bernalillo County, (N/A): The court dismissed the wrongful death and loss of consortium claims, granting summary judgment and finding that workers’ compensation was the exclusive remedy and that sovereign immunity barred the claims (paras 1, 5).
Parties' Submissions
- Plaintiffs-Appellants: Argued that the casino should be estopped from asserting workers’ compensation exclusivity after successfully arguing the opposite before the Workers’ Compensation Administration. They also contended that their claims fell within the Laguna Pueblo’s waiver of sovereign immunity for injuries to visitors under the gaming compact (paras 5, 7, 15-16).
- Defendants-Appellees: Asserted that workers’ compensation provided the exclusive remedy for the claims. They also argued that sovereign immunity barred the claims, as the employee was not a “visitor” under the gaming compact and that loss of consortium was not covered by the waiver (paras 5, 19, 24).
Legal Issues
- Was the district court correct in granting summary judgment based on the exclusivity of the Workers’ Compensation Act?
- Did the district court err in dismissing the wrongful death claim on the grounds of sovereign immunity?
- Does the waiver of sovereign immunity under the gaming compact extend to loss of consortium claims?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of the wrongful death claim and remanded the case for further proceedings (para 27).
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the loss of consortium claim (para 27).
Reasons
Per Bustamante J. (Kennedy and Vigil JJ. concurring):
Workers’ Compensation Exclusivity:
The court held that judicial estoppel barred the defendants from asserting workers’ compensation exclusivity in district court after successfully arguing before the Workers’ Compensation Administration that the employee’s death was outside the course and scope of employment. The inconsistent positions prejudiced the plaintiffs, who had relied on the earlier determination (paras 11-15).
Sovereign Immunity and Wrongful Death:
The court found that the plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded facts suggesting the wrongful death claim fell within the Laguna Pueblo’s waiver of sovereign immunity under the gaming compact. The determination of whether the employee was a “visitor” under the compact was a factual issue that could not be resolved at the pleading stage (paras 16-22).
Loss of Consortium:
The court concluded that the gaming compact’s waiver of sovereign immunity, limited to “bodily injury” or “property damage,” did not extend to loss of consortium claims. Loss of consortium is an emotional injury and not a bodily injury under New Mexico law (paras 24-26).