§ 6.3.6.2 Exclusivity of Workers' Compensation Remedy.169 "It is well settled that work-related injury claims are generally redressed exclusively under Arizona's workers' compensation scheme."170 Although there is some mixed authority, Arizona courts appear to have concluded that negligent infliction claims are precluded by Arizona's workers' compensation scheme.171
In Ringling Bros. & Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows v. Superior Court, the Arizona Court of Appeals considered negligent infliction claims brought by the family of a circus performer who died from injuries sustained while rehearsing a trapeze act.172 The court found that the family members also were employees of the circus and "any injury which they may have suffered as a result of witnessing [the] accident occurred in the course of their employment."173 The court therefore held that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because "a severe emotional reaction to an unexpected event is a compensable injury under the workmen's compensation statutes."174
Similarly, the Arizona Court of Appeals held in Irvin Investors, Inc. v. Superior Court that an employee's claims for negligent hiring, supervision, and retention were precluded by Arizona's workers' compensation scheme.175 The court held that "workers' compensation is the only remedy for this injury."176
Based on Ringling Bros. and Irvin Investors, many cases have dismissed negligent infliction claims as precluded by Arizona's workers' compensation scheme.177 Nevertheless, there are a handful of federal decisions that allowed negligent infliction claims to proceed in the employment setting.178 However, these cases do not appear to have considered the preclusive effect of Arizona's workers' compensation scheme (the issue apparently was not raised), and...
