Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Workers’ Comp and Civil Lawsuit Rules

High Court Reverses Lower Ruling

BOISE, Idaho — The Idaho Supreme Court has ruled that state courts have the authority to decide when an employee may sue an employer in civil court, even if a workers’ compensation claim is already underway.

The decision, issued Sept. 4, 2025, stemmed from a workplace accident involving Cameron Demott Tyler, who lost his right index finger while working for Masterpiece Floors, Inc. Tyler said the injury occurred because he was required to use a table saw without a safety guard, which he claimed was a common practice at the company.

Worker Filed Both Claims

After the accident, Tyler filed a workers’ compensation claim and received some benefits. But he also filed a separate civil lawsuit, arguing that his employer’s conduct was so severe that it fell under a narrow exception in Idaho law. That exception allows employees to pursue damages outside of the workers’ compensation system in limited cases.

When Masterpiece Floors did not respond to the lawsuit, Tyler won a default judgment of more than $380,000. The company later contested the judgment, claiming that the district court could not decide the matter until the Idaho Industrial Commission first determined whether the exception applied.

Dispute Over Court Authority

The district court sided with the employer, placing the judgment on hold and sending the case to the Industrial Commission. The Commission ultimately ruled against Tyler.

Tyler appealed, and the Idaho Supreme Court reversed the lower court. The justices held that district courts do have the authority to determine whether the exception to the workers’ compensation “exclusive remedy” rule applies, even if a workers’ compensation claim is still pending.

The ruling required the district court to reinstate the original default judgment in Tyler’s favor.

Implications for Employers and Insurers

The court’s decision underscores the potential risks employers and insurers face if they fail to act quickly in legal disputes or workplace safety issues. The case shows that delays in responding to lawsuits, as well as unsafe workplace practices, can result in significant liability.

While the Supreme Court did not address the details of any insurance policy, the ruling highlights the need for strong claims management and careful handling of exceptions to workers’ compensation rules.

The decision adds clarity to how Idaho courts will handle cases at the intersection of workers’ compensation and civil liability. Legal experts note that the ruling draws sharper boundaries between the two systems, but questions may remain until further cases test the limits.