North Carolina Court Limited Workers' Compensation Shield

The state court ruled that employees can sue employers for intentional battery and negligence.

Updated on Oct. 13, 2026 in Unions

North Carolina Court Limited Workers' Compensation Shield

Live Poll

Should employees be allowed to sue employers directly for workplace injuries instead of using workers' compensation?

The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that workers may bypass the state's workers' compensation exclusivity provision to sue employers for intentional battery and negligence. The decision impacts cases involving physical abuse by supervisors and the employment status of temporary workers.

Why it matters

The ruling limits the protection employers typically receive under workers' compensation law by allowing lawsuits when intentional torts occur or when no implied contract of hire exists. It ensures that businesses cannot claim statutory immunity without assuming the legal burdens of direct employment.

The court cited the 1985 Pleasant vs. Johnson precedent to clarify that intentional torts fall outside the exclusive remedy of workers' compensation. Additionally, the ruling established that temporary workers lack an implied contract of hire if they are not paid directly by the client company.

The players

North Carolina Court of Appeals

This is the intermediate appellate court in North Carolina that reviews decisions from the state's trial courts.

Hendrick Automotive Group

This is a large automotive retail organization based in Charlotte that faced allegations of supervisor misconduct.

Johnson Concrete

This is a concrete operational business located in Rowan County that was involved in a legal dispute regarding temporary worker injury claims.

The details

In the Hendrick Automotive Group case, a supervisor allegedly repeatedly struck employees on the head and neck, resulting in conditions including vertigo, blurred vision, and numbness. Separately, the court ruled that a temporary worker at Johnson Concrete could pursue a lawsuit for arm injuries sustained while cleaning a mixing blade because the company did not pay the worker directly or provide insurance coverage.

1985: The Pleasant vs. Johnson decision established the intentional tort exception.
2015: Randy Hembree underwent neck surgery.
2022: Jefferson signed with Labor Finders as his symptoms worsened.
November 2025: The court issued an opinion in Solis-Santos vs. Lester.
October 7, 2026: Judge Collins posted the opinion for Robert Jefferson vs. Johnson Concrete.

Political Context

Opponents of this expansion argue that eroding workers' compensation exclusivity could lead to a surge in costly litigation for businesses, potentially destabilizing the established balance of the no-fault system. Advocates for the decision maintain that the ruling provides necessary accountability for egregious employer conduct that falls outside the scope of workplace accidents.

Employees in North Carolina now have a clearer legal path to hold employers accountable for intentional battery or negligence that occurs on the job. This ruling specifically impacts workers in temporary or contracted positions who were previously denied coverage under standard workers' compensation policies.

The takeaway

This decision reinforces that workers' compensation is not a universal shield for all workplace conduct. Employees who suffer from intentional physical abuse by supervisors should consult legal counsel regarding their rights to pursue tort claims outside of the administrative compensation system.