liability texas trespass injury osha
Karen sues a workshop for damages as she was trespassing and disregarding mandatory safety gear. Does she have a case?
<p>Let's paint the scene: We work in the back of a metalworking workshop in Austin Texas. Huge machines make lots of noise, at times there are steel panels on the floor with access holes to access the cabeling, in the entry area is grating to try and keep the metal shavings sticking to boots and pants in check. To complete the picture, there's a big sign &quot;Safety Gear required at all times&quot;, &quot;Crane operation only by trained personnel&quot; and &quot;Only Employees allowed in the workshop&quot; on the door, together with &quot;NO TRESPASSING&quot;. Every employee wears the mandatory steel-toed boots, coveralls, hearing protection, glasses and whatever else is needed.</p>
<p>A wild Karen enters the premises in her car, parks in the loading zone, opens the (unlocked) door to the workshop, then just enters the workshop and, of course, disregards all the signs that tell her that she can't be there. Nothing demands for the premises to be access controlled during work, so the gate of course is open - which also helps with deliveries, for which a bell exists to call someone to the door. But Karen doesn't use that. Entering the clearly marked workshop most likely constitutes trespass on its own, but we don't want to fight <em>that</em> battle if she was trespassing or not.</p>
<p>We focus on the real event: Because people wear the mandated hearing protection in the deafening loud workspace, nobody noticed her entering the moment she does. And, in her infinite wisdom, Karen wears stilettos. The OSHA-compliant grating at the entry traps one of her heels, it breaks and she falls forward, right into the clearly marked waste dropoff area. She falls face-first into a bin of metal filings, suffering injuries to her face and eyes. Blinded, she flails around and moments later finds the remote of the very crane that put the box of shavings there. Using it as a way to lift herself, her fingers press the button to release the hook and it hits the back of her head.</p>
<p>Now, about a minute after the events started, someone notices the intruder and calls an ambulance. After being released from hospital, Karen believes that she is in the right to sue our metal workshop for negligence so we have to pay her hospital bills...</p>
<p><strong>Does Karen's claim, that the shop 'caused her injuries and suffering' hold water, if the shop was OSHA compliant and she was trespassing without mandated safety equipment, which directly lead to the injuries? Or might her claim be useless because she violated all sorts of clearly marked rules?</strong></p>
<p>(useless here means: can be dismissed in the very first stages of litigation due to a motion for dismissal/summary judgement, or even dismissal as frivolous)</p>

<p>This is a pretty good example of &quot;Contributory Negligence&quot;.</p>
<p>Depending on the precise details of the case, both (or multiple) parties may have contributed to Karen's injuries.</p>
<p>She certainly had some role by ignoring posted signs and wearing inappropriate footwear.</p>
<p>But the shop may have made access too easy.  Maybe they didn't have a front-desk person posted in a safe-area, causing her to go seeking an employee.</p>
<p>The shop had a dangerous bin of metal shavings without a lid on it, and at a height and location where a single misstep means someone could fall into it head-first.</p>
<p>They had dangerous crane-control mechanism in easy reach that didn't need a Key or other Lock-out mechanism.</p>
<p>Ultimately, the details will matter. But it should be straightforward for mediation or a trial to determine each parties contribution to the overall unsafe situation and injuries.  Taking the description above at face-value, I think Karen and the shop might both be found partially responsible for the injuries.  It may not be a 50/50 split, but Karen likely acted unreasonably, and the shop, despite OSHA compliance, may well have created more hazards than appropriate.</p>
