Opinion ID: 2510363
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: the first question certified by the federal court may be mooted by a two-fold bar an election of remedies or issue preclusion

Text: ¶ 2 The first legal question posed to us whether the employer is protected by the § 12 immunity from liability in tortpresents for our resolution a proposition of public law. [5] When confronting a matter of public law, this court is utterly free to choose sua sponte its own framework of dispositive legal problem-solving techniques (theories and remedial avenues) to arrive at the most appropriate answer. [6] If either of the two bars described by this dissent is invocable against either defendant, that defendant's § 12 immunity becomes an academic issue. Once it is clear that the claim is not actionable against a party, the § 12 immunity interposed by that party is beyond the court's need to notice. No party is ever called upon to raise its immunity from liability against a claim of another which is nonactionable. ¶ 3 The barrier of (1) plaintiff's earlier remedy selection of compensation law and her successful prosecution of benefits' recovery [7] and/or (2) of issue preclusion by a Workers' Compensation Court's finding that decedent's on-the-job injury was accidental must be judicially removed as unavailable before this court can be called upon to consider the immediate employer's and the potential principal employer's § 12 immunity from tort liability. The latter employer, once found to stand in the status of principal employer, would fully enjoy the benefits of both legal barriers, if otherwise applicable.