Pierce Atwood writing in Lexology® documented lawsuits filed to date relating to COVID-19 across many industries, jurisdictions and areas of law.
Banks, businesses, food processors, health care providers and even government agencies are vulnerable to lawsuits as evidenced by filings during the past two month. Areas of contention include:
- CARES Act and the Payroll Protection Program (PPP):- Numerous cases have been filed against banks relating to alleged maladministration of loans under the CARES Act and the Payroll Protection Program, claiming financial losses and demanding injunctive relief.
- Debt relief:- Cases have been filed against financial institutions requesting suspension of foreclosure, loan repayments and debt collection. Some cases involve forbearance on mortgages, allegations of incorrect credit reporting.
- Educational institutions:- Over 120 class action claims have been instituted by students as a result of campus closures. Students have alleged breach of contract relating to university tuition, dormitory housing and related fees. State institutions, independent colleges and for-profit entities have been named as defendants.
- Employment:- Lawsuits are based on alleged deviation from workplace safety, paid leave, discrepancies over wages and hourly rates, privacy, disability and discrimination. Litigants have cited The Family First Coronavirus Response Act, state labor laws and the CARES Act.
- Event cancellations and service disruptions:- This category of claims will evolve as COVID restrictions are extended possibly through entire 2021. Claims have been instituted against airlines for cancelled flights, breach of contract and contravention of consumer protection laws with both U.S. and international airlines as defendants. Travel companies are also the subject of lawsuits seeking refunds of payments for cancelled itineraries. Claims have been filed against organizers of sports events and concerts for cancellations.
- Membership services and subscriptions:- Plaintiffs allege breach of contract and consumer protection laws against fitness clubs, amusement parks and other entertainment venues. Cases have been filed against detention and corrections facilities seeking relief based on exposure to COVID-19. Numerous cases have been filed at will and have yet to emerge relating to constitutional claims challenging reopening of public schools, wearing protective face coverings, discrimination against minorities, mail-in ballots, implementation of the CARES Act, stay-at-home orders and worship.
- Health care providers:- Despite an executive order shielding health care providers from civil liability, operators of long-term and rehabilitation facilities are vulnerable to legal action for failure to provide appropriate care.
- Insurance:- Owners of businesses are claiming under policies purchased to provide compensation for disruption in business and especially forced business closure as a result of COVID-19 orders.
Pricing and marketing:- Cases have been filed against manufactures and sellers of products and providers of services with respect to alleged misrepresentation in advertising and labeling, invoking consumer protection laws. It is noted that food delivery services including GrubHub may have initiated an advertising campaign to convince customers that competitor’s restaurants are closed. Cal-Maine Foods is the defendant in a class action suit alleging price gouging during the late March and early April rise in price.
- Exacerbation of COVID-19:- This category of claims relates to negligent spread of COVID-19 or deliberate withholding of information on risks relating to transmission of the infection. This category specifically was directed against cruise lines and senior care facilities that allegedly failed to protect residents. It is expected that a number of lawsuits will be forthcoming alleging failure to protect workers in meat-packing and poultry processing plants. These will take a form of class action suits brought by unions and by groups of employees in a specific plant. The Executive Order requiring plants to open, provided some degree of indemnity subject to compliance with OSHA and CDC guidelines. Since late March, guidelines have been changed and whether operators of plants were in fact adhering to requirements could represent the potential for litigation.
The Coronavirus Relief bill introduced in the Senate would provide broad protection for employers and cap damages unless plaintiffs can demonstrate willful misconduct or gross negligence. The alternative House bill does not provide indemnity for employers and calls for stricter standards of protection.
It is evident that employers in agriculture clearly define risks associated with COVID-19 and is intended to ensure that the employees understand company regulations imposed to limit the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace. Human resources managers should work closely with their legal departments or advisors to develop appropriate policies based on the recommendations of industrial hygienists and epidemiologists.