Opinion ID: 2192908
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: intentional act exception

Text: Finally, plaintiffs assert that Shamrock engaged in conduct which was extreme and outrageous and intentionally or recklessly caused severe emotional distress, thus maintaining a cause of action under the intentional act exception of KRS 342.690(1). A careful reading of KRS 342.690(1) yields the following language: [t]he exemption from liability given an employer by this section ... shall not apply in any case where the injury or death is proximately caused by the willful and unprovoked physical aggression of such employee, officer or director. (Emphasis added). Further, the legislature has specified that the only exception to the exclusive remedy is for the willful and unprovoked physical aggression.  Zurich, 712 S.W.2d at 342 (emphasis added). Thus, absent willful and unprovoked physical aggression by an employee, officer, or director, there is no exception to the exclusive liability provision of the Workers' Compensation Act. For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the Court of Appeals and order the writ of prohibition be granted in accordance with this Opinion. COOPER, KELLER, and WINTERSHEIMER, JJ., concur. GRAVES, J., dissents by separate opinion, with LAMBERT, C.J., and STUMBO, J., joining that dissent.