Late Wednesday evening, supporters of a controversial bill that would allow some Oklahoma employers to “opt out” of the state’s traditional workers’ compensation system [see Oklahoma House Bill 2155] fell...
Oklahoma’s Controversial “Opt Out” Legislation Fails (At Least Temporarily) Oklahoma’s Controversial “Opt Out” Legislation Fails (At Least Temporarily)In August 2007, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered the empanelment of a statewide grand jury to investigate various criminal offenses, including activities related to check cashers. In 2008, the...
The Fight Against Workers’ Compensation Fraud Takes Many Forms–Florida Goes After Unscrupulous Check Cashing Firms The Fight Against Workers’ Compensation Fraud Takes Many Forms–Florida Goes After Unscrupulous Check Cashing FirmsIn yesterday’s post, I pointed out the difficulty courts (and not a few practitioners) have had with a specific form of neutral risk–those in which an employee falls while walking...
Virginia Court Affirms Denial of Benefits Related to Unexplained Fall In Spite of Evidence That Claimant’s Step From Truck Was Larger Than Normal Staircase Distance Virginia Court Affirms Denial of Benefits Related to Unexplained Fall In Spite of Evidence That Claimant’s Step From Truck Was Larger Than Normal Staircase DistanceThere’s nothing like an employee’s unexplained fall while walking on a level, unobstructed floor to test one’s position on the positional risk doctrine in workers’ compensation claims. As was noted...
North Dakota Supreme Court Refuses to Adopt Positional Risk Doctrine in Unexplained Fall Cases North Dakota Supreme Court Refuses to Adopt Positional Risk Doctrine in Unexplained Fall Casesby Thomas A. Robinson A divided Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Brown v. Cassens Transp. Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6929 (6th Cir. Apr. 6, 2012), has again reversed...
Divided Sixth Circuit Court Delivers Body Blow to Michigan’s Continuing Battle Regarding RICO Claims and Comp Exclusivity Divided Sixth Circuit Court Delivers Body Blow to Michigan’s Continuing Battle Regarding RICO Claims and Comp ExclusivityAn Ohio appellate court, in Lebron v. A&A Safety, Inc., 2012 Ohio 1637, 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 1435 (Apr. 12, 2012), recently affirmed a trial court’s summary judgment order favoring...
Ohio: Employer’s Failure to Call Employee Back to Work Was Due to Poor Economy, Not Retaliatory Motive for the Filing of a Comp Claim Ohio: Employer’s Failure to Call Employee Back to Work Was Due to Poor Economy, Not Retaliatory Motive for the Filing of a Comp ClaimGenerally speaking, the insurance carrier (and any third-party administrator representing the carrier), while performing its proper role in the workers compensation claims process, shares the employer’s immunity to suit by...
Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party AdministratorA worker, who lost the use of his legs in 1965 in a work-related accident, and who was thereafter confined to a wheelchair, is not entitled to additional workers compensation...
Ohio: Trauma Induced Stroke Sustained In Fall From Wheelchair Is Not Compensable Aggravation of Original Injury Ohio: Trauma Induced Stroke Sustained In Fall From Wheelchair Is Not Compensable Aggravation of Original InjuryThe First Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed sanctions in the form of $34,908.12 in attorney’s fees against a Massachusetts attorney representing a plaintiff in a civil suit filed against...
1st Circuit: “Persistence” On the Part of Injured Employee’s Attorney Results in Attorney Being Sanctioned With Almost $35,000 in Attorney’s Fees 1st Circuit: “Persistence” On the Part of Injured Employee’s Attorney Results in Attorney Being Sanctioned With Almost $35,000 in Attorney’s Fees