Throwback Thursday: Boyd v. Young (1951)

When Cancer Meets Causation: Wrestling with Medical Mystery in 1951 In workers’ compensation law, few challenges prove more vexing than establishing causation when the medical community itself admits ignorance about…

Sorry! You must be a member to access this content!

Jun 5, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Boyd v. Young (1951)

Throwback Thursday: Boyd v. Young (1951) Throwback Thursday: Boyd v. Young (1951)

Issue commentary

May 15, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Kowalski v. Shell Oil Co. (Cal. 1979)

Lent Employees and the Boundary of the Employment Relationship In the long and sometimes tangled history of American workers’ compensation law, few issues generate more uncertainty—and more litigation—than lent employment....

Throwback Thursday: Kowalski v. Shell Oil Co. (Cal. 1979) Throwback Thursday: Kowalski v. Shell Oil Co. (Cal. 1979)

Issue commentary

May 9, 2013

Oklahoma: Workers’ Compensation “Opt-Out” Provisions Become Law

On Tuesday (May 7), Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed into law Senate Bill 1062, a legislative piece that purports to reform the state’s workers’ compensation system in two broad fashions:...

Oklahoma: Workers’ Compensation “Opt-Out” Provisions Become Law Oklahoma: Workers’ Compensation “Opt-Out” Provisions Become Law

Issue commentary

Dec 1, 2017

Medical Benefits Must be “Reasonable and Necessary”—Not Just Beneficial

Virginia Employer Need Not Provide Specialized “Running Blade” Prosthesis While all but a few American jurisdictions require employers to provide medical benefits that are essentially unlimited in terms of duration...

Medical Benefits Must be “Reasonable and Necessary”—Not Just Beneficial Medical Benefits Must be “Reasonable and Necessary”—Not Just Beneficial

Case comment