Brian Lindsay, a chemistry major, participated in a summer research program at St. Olaf College. The 10-week program required him to work in a laboratory under the direction of a chemistry professor. Lindsay received a $3,500 stipend and free housing. On July 11, 2002, he was performing a procedure to clean, or "quench," a flask. The flask exploded, spraying chemical materials at Lindsay and setting his clothes on fire. He suffered severe burns. Later, in a Minnesota state court, he sued St. Olaf College for negligence.

Legal question: In responding to Lindsay's claims, the college asserted that during the summer program, he was an employee rather than a student. As an injured employee, Lindsay would receive workers' compensation, which serves as the exclusive legal remedy. Workers' compensation generally covers a portion of lost salary, pays medical bills, and provides a death benefit. Injured employees may not sue for damages, including pain and suffering. St. Olaf sought to have Lindsay's lawsuit thrown out, without a trial, on the basis of his employment status. The core legal question was whether, at the time he was injured, Lindsay was a student furthering his education or an employee performing work for the college. Which party, in essence, was providing services to the other?

Case status: In a decision this January, the Minnesota Court of Appeals decided that it needed more facts to resolve the issue. It ruled that Lindsay deserved a trial on the question of whether he was an employee or a student.

Rationale: According to the court, the key distinctions between a student worker who remains a student and one who becomes an employee are "the purposes and character of the work assigned and performed by that student." Lindsay argued that St. Olaf's professors rarely publish their research results, which indicates that the purpose of the summer program was educational. He also relied on representations that St. Olaf's officials made about the program's educational nature to the organization that donated the summer stipends.

But the college pointed to summaries of the program that chemistry professors gave to applicants. The summaries, both written and oral, described only faculty research proposals, suggesting that students were engaged in order to support faculty members.

The Court of Appeals observed that no prior Minnesota decision directly dealt with the exact question posed in the case. In one similar situation, a postgraduate intern was injured while working at a sanitarium. Although the intern was receiving valuable experience, the sanitarium exercised control over her work. At the time of her injury, moreover, she was performing tasks of a "menial or mechanical nature," which primarily benefited the facility. The Minnesota Supreme Court concluded that the intern was an employee, eligible for only workers' compensation and not damages for negligence.

In the Lindsay case, the Court of Appeals noted the sketchy record presented for its consideration. "What neither party provides is any meaningful description of the work Lindsay was assigned to perform or actually did perform. … Specifically, there is no detail regarding the activities that could either be characterized as benefiting St. Olaf or, alternatively, the student. Moreover, even with respect to the task that resulted in Lindsay's injuries — the 'quenching' of a still pot — we are unable to discern whether his work was 'menial or mechanical' in nature such that it would be properly characterized as a service provided to St. Olaf, rather than by St. Olaf."

Implications for higher education: When a student assistant, intern, or other student worker suffers a job injury, a legal question immediately arises: Will the student receive workers' compensation, or will the university face the potentially greater exposure of a lawsuit? The recent decision outlines the key factors that Minnesota uses to make that determination. Other states deal with the issue directly in their workers'-compensation laws, excluding students from the definition of employee. Every college should understand how its jurisdiction treats student workers.

The status of student workers becomes more complex in joint arrangements between colleges and other entities, such as externship sites or research partners. Which entity is the employer? If the affiliated organization is in another state, which state's workers'-compensation law applies?

Colleges should create policies on the status and responsibilities of student workers to reflect state law and court decisions on workers' compensation. Clarifying in advance whether the student is an employee can help avert litigation or, if an injured student files suit, provide evidence of the institution's intentions.

A final lesson from Brian Lindsay's experience is that litigation is slow. It was nearly six years after the laboratory accident that the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that he was entitled to a trial on whether he was, on July 11, 2002, an employee or a student.

Ann H. Franke is a lawyer who specializes in the legal problems of colleges. Her firm, Wise Results LLC, is based in Washington.