Newest Articles

Mar 6, 2026

New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits

Every dollar spent on workers’ compensation falls into one of two broad categories: benefits paid to injured workers—medical care and wage replacement—and the costs of delivering those benefits. The second...

New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits
Mar 5, 2026

Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage

In Motors v. Bayly (Red House Motors d/b/a Bayly’s Garage), 2026 Del. LEXIS 92 (Mar. 2, 2026), the Delaware Supreme Court reversed a Superior Court decision that the high court...

Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage
Mar 3, 2026

Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision

In Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Department of Financial Services, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 1469 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 25, 2026), the First District Court of Appeal recently held that...

Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision
Feb 26, 2026

Florida Court: IME Report Is Not a “Prescription” for Attendant Care

The Florida First District Court of Appeal has reversed an award of 24-hour attendant care benefits where the only “prescription” supporting the award appeared in an Independent Medical Examiner’s report...

Florida Court: IME Report Is Not a “Prescription” for Attendant Care Florida Court: IME Report Is Not a “Prescription” for Attendant Care

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Apr 29, 2025

Georgia Court Blocks Assigned Negligence Claim Over Lapsed Workers’ Compensation Coverage

In Diaz Arriola v. Coleman, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 161 (Apr. 24, 2025), the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of an injured employee’s assigned negligence and breach of...

Georgia Court Blocks Assigned Negligence Claim Over Lapsed Workers’ Compensation Coverage Georgia Court Blocks Assigned Negligence Claim Over Lapsed Workers’ Compensation Coverage
Apr 28, 2025

Hawaii Supreme Court Clarifies Employee Status in Workers’ Compensation Context

The Hawai’i Supreme Court recently held that a tenant who performed maintenance work on rental property, in exchange for reduced rent and occasional payment, was an employee—not a volunteer—and accordingly...

Hawaii Supreme Court Clarifies Employee Status in Workers’ Compensation Context Hawaii Supreme Court Clarifies Employee Status in Workers’ Compensation Context
Apr 24, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Lee v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. (1950)

The Rise of the Odd-Lot Doctrine In the world of workers’ compensation, some of the most influential doctrines arise not from statutory overhaul or regulatory edict, but from judicial insight...

Throwback Thursday: Lee v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. (1950) Throwback Thursday: Lee v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. (1950)
Apr 22, 2025

SD Supreme Court Weighs Conflicting Medical Evidence

Reverses Factual Findings Where Evidence Was in Deposition Form In a split decision, the South Dakota Supreme Court reversed—in relevant part—a Department of Labor determination that had ruled a claimant’s...

SD Supreme Court Weighs Conflicting Medical Evidence SD Supreme Court Weighs Conflicting Medical Evidence
Apr 21, 2025

MN High Court Reaffirms Case-Specific Standard in PTD Retirement Presumption Cases

In a thoughtful and clarifying opinion, the Minnesota Supreme Court has reaffirmed the case-specific nature of the statutory retirement presumption applicable to permanent total disability (PTD) claims under Minn. Stat....

MN High Court Reaffirms Case-Specific Standard in PTD Retirement Presumption Cases MN High Court Reaffirms Case-Specific Standard in PTD Retirement Presumption Cases
Apr 17, 2025

Throwback Thursday: O’Leary v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, Inc. (U.S., 1951)

Introduction In 1951, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in O’Leary v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, Inc., 340 U.S. 504, 71 S.Ct. 470, 95 L.Ed.483 (1951). The case involved a claim...

Throwback Thursday: O’Leary v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, Inc. (U.S., 1951) Throwback Thursday: O’Leary v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, Inc. (U.S., 1951)
Apr 15, 2025

Arkansas Court Denies Benefits to Good Samaritan Band Director

In a ruling that reaffirms Arkansas’ strict interpretation of its “employment services” requirement, the state’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed a Workers’ Compensation Commission decision denying benefits to the family...

Arkansas Court Denies Benefits to Good Samaritan Band Director Arkansas Court Denies Benefits to Good Samaritan Band Director
Apr 14, 2025

Louisiana Court Rejects “Borrowed Employee” Theory in Workplace Attack

In a decision that further defines the barriers to pursuing civil remedies in workplace injury cases within the Louisiana, a state appellant court recently affirmed summary a trial court judgment...

Louisiana Court Rejects “Borrowed Employee” Theory in Workplace Attack Louisiana Court Rejects “Borrowed Employee” Theory in Workplace Attack
Apr 10, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Hawk v. Jim Hawk Chevrolet-Buick, Inc., 282 N.W.2d 84 (Iowa 1979)

Background On September 28, 1973, at approximately 2:30 a.m., James Hawk II, the president, sole stockholder, and chief operating officer of Jim Hawk Chevrolet-Buick, Inc., died when his private airplane...

Throwback Thursday: Hawk v. Jim Hawk Chevrolet-Buick, Inc., 282 N.W.2d 84 (Iowa 1979) Throwback Thursday: Hawk v. Jim Hawk Chevrolet-Buick, Inc., 282 N.W.2d 84 (Iowa 1979)
Apr 8, 2025

NC Court Rejects Tort Claim for Workplace Fatality

In a decision that underscores the high bar for pursuing civil remedies alongside a workers’ compensation claim, the North Carolina Court of Appeals recently affirmed summary judgment against the estate...

NC Court Rejects Tort Claim for Workplace Fatality NC Court Rejects Tort Claim for Workplace Fatality
Apr 7, 2025

PA Court Upholds Medical-Only Notice of Compensation Payable Issued by Mistake

What happens when a claims adjuster clicks the wrong box in the third-party administrator’s software—and it accidentally binds the employer to a workers’ compensation claim? In City of Philadelphia v....

PA Court Upholds Medical-Only Notice of Compensation Payable Issued by Mistake PA Court Upholds Medical-Only Notice of Compensation Payable Issued by Mistake
Apr 3, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Graybeal v. Board of Supervisors (1975)

Rethinking the Limits of “Course of Employment” In traditional workers’ compensation doctrine, an injury must not only “arise out of” employment but also occur “in the course of” employment. Courts...

Throwback Thursday: Graybeal v. Board of Supervisors (1975) Throwback Thursday: Graybeal v. Board of Supervisors (1975)

New Comments

  • ramivou: They hid behind a flawed "reading" of this statute for a decade. I am glad the SC finally put an end to the misconception that it was a "first six months only" filing requirement, rather than an ongoing responsibility.
  • trob: Thanks for the query. New York's going and coming doctrine is similar to that in place in the majority of jurisdictions. That is to say that for employees with a fixed place of work and who are on a relatively consistent work schedule, the commute to and from the residence is outside the course and scope of the employment. Often overlooked is the fact that the employee must generally have a fixed ...
  • ramivou: Is coming and going covered in NY?
  • trob: Excellent question. My thought is that the employer was following what it assumed was the typical practice of seeking to protect its "subrogation" interest in state court; in virtually all jurisdictions, the state trial courts are where subrogation issues are litigated. What differed here, of course, was that it wasn't a standard subrogation case, i.e., the employee's work-related injury wasn't ca...
  • ramivou: Why didn't they file it with the state Commission instead?
  • Thomas A. Robinson: I suspect that ACME could seek contractual indemnity, as you note, either from the staffing agency or its carrier. The goal of the Board or agency generally is to see to the proper award of benefits for compensable injuries. Allowing the "aggrieved" parties to sort it out later is completely consistent with the overall theory of workers' compensation. Many thanks for the comment. Best wishes.
  • Barry Stinson: I wonder if Acme's insurer could seek contractural indemnity from Variety's insurer outside of the WC system.
  • Michael C. Duff: The conceptual distinction is between joint causation and presumptive single causation.
  • Thomas A. Robinson: Sorry, I don't/can't provide legal advice. Best wishes, however.
  • Ken Smith: What can I do when my attorney blows my case with an incomplete RB89