Employer Immunity and “Workers’ Compensation”
Published .
The general concept
Workers’ compensation generally gives an employee benefits for a covered work injury without requiring proof that the employer was negligent. In exchange, the law usually limits a covered employee’s ability to sue the employer in tort for that injury. This is often called the exclusive-remedy rule. It does not necessarily protect every person or company connected to the workplace, and it has statutory exceptions.
How Maryland applies it
Maryland Labor and Employment § 9-509 generally makes a complying employer’s liability for a covered work injury exclusive to the Workers’ Compensation Act, subject to the Act’s exceptions. The Supreme Court of Maryland held in Ledford v. Jenway Contracting, Inc. that this exclusivity barred even a nondependent adult child’s wrongful-death claim against a complying employer when the employee died in a workplace accident. A covered employee may generally pursue workers’ compensation and may also bring a damages action against a responsible person other than the employer under §§ 9-901 and 9-902. If compensation has been paid, the employer or insurer may have reimbursement rights from a third-party recovery, and the statute governs allocation. The Act permits an action against an employer when the injury or death results from the employer’s deliberate intent to injure or kill; it also provides a damages action when the employer failed to secure required coverage. Whether a worker is covered, who qualifies as an employer, and whether an exception applies can be decisive.
Related Maryland Cases and Authorities
Md. Code, Labor & Employment §§ 9-501, 9-509, 9-901, and 9-902; Ledford v. Jenway Contracting, Inc., 490 Md. 666, 338 A.3d 563 (2025); Brady v. Ralph M. Parsons Co., 308 Md. 486 (1987).