You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

PepsiCo, Inc. v. Pierce

Citations: 802 P.2d 1291; 1990 OK 126; 61 O.B.A.J. 3203; 1990 Okla. LEXIS 143; 1990 WL 191515Docket: No. 74756

Court: Supreme Court of Oklahoma; December 3, 1990; Oklahoma; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, PepsiCo contested a Workers’ Compensation Court order certifying its liability as a guarantor for the workers’ compensation claims of Lee Way Motor Freight, a now-defunct entity. The primary legal issues revolved around PepsiCo's status as a guarantor, the awarding of attorney fees, and the penalty for wrongful termination of benefits. The court reaffirmed PepsiCo's designation as a guarantor based on precedents from related cases, upholding its secondary liability. Regarding attorney fees, the court vacated the award to unpaid health care providers, citing the lack of authorization under section 30 of the Workers’ Compensation Act. Additionally, PepsiCo's objection to a 15% penalty for wrongful termination of temporary benefits was rejected, as the company inherited all liabilities, including penalties, upon assuming the role of guarantor. The Workers’ Compensation Court's order was upheld in all respects except for the attorney fees, which were vacated. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court’s rulings. The decision saw concurrence from several justices, with various levels of agreement and one recusal.

Legal Issues Addressed

Attorney Fees under Workers’ Compensation Act

Application: The court vacated the award of attorney fees to unpaid health care providers, as such awards are not authorized under section 30 of the Workers’ Compensation Act.

Reasoning: The court found that, as in Sharp, the award of attorney fees was not authorized under section 30 of the Workers’ Compensation Act and vacated this portion of the order.

Guarantor Liability in Workers’ Compensation Claims

Application: PepsiCo's designation as guarantor for the workers’ compensation claims of a defunct company was upheld based on precedents set in related cases.

Reasoning: PepsiCo's challenge to its designation as guarantor was previously resolved against it in earlier cases. The court affirmed that PepsiCo's secondary liability was correctly invoked in this instance.

Penalty for Wrongful Termination of Benefits

Application: PepsiCo is liable for a statutory penalty for the wrongful termination of benefits as the guarantor, inheriting all liabilities including penalties upon the defunct company's default.

Reasoning: The court rejected this argument, stating that as guarantor, PepsiCo inherited the obligation to cover all liabilities, including penalties, when it stepped into Lee Way's role upon default.