Sinclair

INTRODUCTION

Jeff Sinclair (Sinclair) and his wife (collectively Sinclairs) appeal from a summary

judgment in favor of Sinclair's former employer, Praxair, Inc. (Praxair). They contend

Praxair was not entitled to summary judgment because there are triable issues of material

fact as to whether their tort claims fall within the fraudulent concealment exception to the

workers' compensation exclusivity rule. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Sinclair worked for Praxair's predecessor and Praxair collecting and testing soil,

water, and air samples from potentially contaminated sites. During his employment, he

underwent annual physical examinations.1 In 1993 his physical examination report

showed he had abnormal lab results and stated he should follow up with his own

physician. It also stated, "[n]o renal exposures."

In 1994, his examination showed he had high blood urea nitrogen and creatinine

levels. As in 1993, the examiner noted on the results "[n]o renal exposures" and

indicated Sinclair must follow up with his own doctor.

The record includes information for the examinations conducted in 1993, 1994, 1997, 1999, 2002, and 2009. It…