Slowly Plods the Tortoise: Workcompwriter Celebrates 1,000 Posts

Launch the balloons! Break out the kazoos! Almost exactly ten years ago—on December 14, 2011—I posted my first offering on this website (to see it, click here). It discussed a Supreme Court of Nebraska decision related to misrepresentations made on a pre-employment questionnaire. Exciting stuff—I think it had 14 views that first day. Today, I post “number 1,000.” How time flies when you’re having fun!

A devoted friend and colleague flattered me several weeks ago when we discussed my upcoming post no. 1,000. He allowed that if one wanted to to get an overview of any important issue within the workers’ compensation world, a query to my blog was a good start.

I think he may have overstated things. He did, however, touch on my overall posting philosophy: I try to present cases and issues that I think are important for general consumption by comp attorneys and claims folks in our legal community. Your state may have never had a decision on pre-employment misrepresentations. And it’s likely that the courts in your state will not rely upon a Nebraska decision. I maintain, however, that an interesting decision or statute is still interesting, even if it doesn’t apply to your specific setting.

My goal is to get you thinking. I agree with my friend to this extent: If one gazes back over my posts during the past ten years, I think he or she will get a reasonably granular snapshot of the workers’ compensation world.

Timely Topics

Over the past ten years, I’ve tried to discuss some of the most important issues faced within “our” workers’ compensation world. A few come quickly to mind, including at least the following:

• Florida’s contentious “Padgett” fight over the constitutionality of that state’s Act
• Oklahoma’s turbulent opt-out controversy
• Pennsylvania’s Protz decision, and its aftermath [i.e., use of “the most recent edition of the AMA Guides”]
• The slow, but steady “progress” made in the acceptance of medical marijuana
• COVID-19 (23 separate article posts)

I’ve also tried to include some bread and butter posts. For example, because I have always thought the issue fascinating, I have posted 55 articles dealing, in some manner, with the “going and coming” rule.

Article With the Most Hits

What post has had the most hits? This one will surprise you for two reasons. First, one just wouldn’t expect it to elicit broad attention. Second, the number of hits it has garnered dwarfs those of any other blog post. It isn’t close!

On January 6, 2017, when I posted a blog article discussing a New York appellate court’s decision holding that a prominent opera singer at the Metropolitan Opera House was not an employee—due to a special, quirky New York statute—and, therefore, could sue the Met in tort for injuries sustained during a performance, I thought to myself, “Now, this one’s a yawner.”

Wow! Was I wrong. Apparently due to the fact that each of my blog posts is automatically posted to Twitter—it soon was “re-tweeted” multiple times—the thing went viral in the New York City opera world. The post got more than 2,500 hits that first day. It almost crashed my site. The piece had several thousand more hits in the week to follow, skewing my traffic statistics for the entire month.

Bizarre Lists

Also popular over the years have been my annual posts identifying the “Top Ten Bizarre Workers’ Comp Cases” of the previous year. As some of you know, one year National Public Radio used my list on its Saturday morning show, “Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me.”

Tip of the Hat to Arthur Larson

I’d be remiss if I didn’t tip my hat and offer several thousand words of thanks to my mentor, Arthur Larson. My bizarre list comes directly out of a January ritual that he and I enjoyed during the last 8 years of his life. My interest in workers’ compensation law, honed initially during ten years of law practice (1976-1986), came to full fruit in my happy association with Arthur at Duke Law School. I still “talk” to him years after his passing: “Arthur, how should I treat this decision?” “Arthur, have you seen this statutory amendment?” He doesn’t answer, of course, but the experience that I’ve gained over the past 35 years working on the Larson treatise (and other related publications) generally gives me a good place to start my thought processes. Again, thank you, Arthur!

The Blog Continues + Something New

My plan is to continue this Blog as long as the Good Lord allows me to read, think, and type (or dictate). At 70 years old, I probably don’t have more than 20 or so years of productivity left, but that should allow me to finish—at my current pace—something like 2,000 more posts. I hope you enjoy them.

In this blog post number 1,000, I had hoped to make a formal announcement about some new writing plans that are in the works. Alas, too many details—some practical, others technical—remain to be ironed out. Suffice it to say that early in 2022, I hope to launch a new, additional “something or other.” It will be primarily electronic, although there may be some sort of annual print version as well.

You see, none of our four children chose to go to law school. They all have active, important careers of their own. I don’t, therefore, have anyone—other than you as a workers’ compensation community—to whom I might pass my baton. I guard that baton and plan to pass it slowly. I’m endeavoring to find a suitable means to do so but, as I say, more about that in January.

Thank You

In the meantime, many, many thanks to each of you that read—even occasionally—what I post herein. Over the years, some of you have provided interesting email commentary on my posts. I’ve learned much from you. Others have suggested that I write on this issue or that and for those suggestions, I’m grateful. As we move forward into a new year, I wish all of you Peace.