Newest Articles

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
Feb 24, 2026

Issue Commentary: Where PA Worker’s Injury is Compensable, Does That Automatically Mean Co-Employee is Immune from Tort Liability?

PA Supreme Court Addresses Scope of Co-Employee Immunity In Brown v. Gaydos, 2026 Pa. LEXIS 267 (Pa. Feb. 18, 2026), a divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s reversal...

Issue Commentary: Where PA Worker’s Injury is Compensable, Does That Automatically Mean Co-Employee is Immune from Tort Liability? Issue Commentary: Where PA Worker’s Injury is Compensable, Does That Automatically Mean Co-Employee is Immune from Tort Liability?

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Apr 9, 2013

Louisiana: Police Officer Fails To Establish Acute Appendicitis Claim Was Connected to Fall at Police Station

A Louisiana appellate court recently affirmed a finding by the Office of Workers’ Compensation that granted an employer police department’s motion for summary judgment regarding a claim filed by a...

Louisiana: Police Officer Fails To Establish Acute Appendicitis Claim Was Connected to Fall at Police Station Louisiana: Police Officer Fails To Establish Acute Appendicitis Claim Was Connected to Fall at Police Station
Apr 8, 2013

Montana’s Hutterite Colony Seeks Review by U.S. Supreme Court of Decision Requiring it to Provide Workers’ Compensation Coverage for Colony’s Workers

On April 1, the Hutterite Colony, a small religious sect in Montana, asked the United States Supreme Court to review and overturn a decision by the Supreme Court of Montana...

Montana’s Hutterite Colony Seeks Review by U.S. Supreme Court of Decision Requiring it to Provide Workers’ Compensation Coverage for Colony’s Workers Montana’s Hutterite Colony Seeks Review by U.S. Supreme Court of Decision Requiring it to Provide Workers’ Compensation Coverage for Colony’s Workers
Apr 8, 2013

Arkansas: Health Care Technician Fails to Establish Corneal Ulcer Was Associated With Work-Related Urine Splash

An Arkansas appellate court recently affirmed a decision denying a claim filed by a patient-care technician who contended that her corneal ulcer resulted from or was exacerbated by a workplace...

Arkansas: Health Care Technician Fails to Establish Corneal Ulcer Was Associated With Work-Related Urine Splash Arkansas: Health Care Technician Fails to Establish Corneal Ulcer Was Associated With Work-Related Urine Splash
Mar 29, 2013

Virginia: Employee’s Refusal of Second Knee Surgery Justified

On Tuesday, a Virginia appellate court affirmed a decision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that reinstated disability benefits to a convenience store employee who refused to undergo recommended surgery–a...

Virginia: Employee’s Refusal of Second Knee Surgery Justified Virginia: Employee’s Refusal of Second Knee Surgery Justified
Mar 27, 2013

Maine: Employer Not Entitled to Offset Incapacity Benefits Against Specific Loss Award for Amputation

The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine recently reversed an award by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that had granted an employee specific loss benefits for the amputation of a finger,...

Maine: Employer Not Entitled to Offset Incapacity Benefits Against Specific Loss Award for Amputation Maine: Employer Not Entitled to Offset Incapacity Benefits Against Specific Loss Award for Amputation
Mar 25, 2013

New York: No Death Benefits Awarded Where Work-Related Heart Attack Occurred 24 Years Earlier

A New York appellate court recently affirmed a finding by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that ruled that the death of claimant’s husband was not causally related to his employment...

New York: No Death Benefits Awarded Where Work-Related Heart Attack Occurred 24 Years Earlier New York: No Death Benefits Awarded Where Work-Related Heart Attack Occurred 24 Years Earlier
Mar 23, 2013

Ohio: Appellate Court Distinguishes Case from Earlier Moorehead Decision: No Loss of Use of Trucker’s Legs Where He May Have Survived Wreck for Brief Period of Time

An Ohio appellate court recently affirmed a decision by the state’s Industrial Commission that had denied additional workers’ compensation benefits for the scheduled loss of use of both of a...

Ohio: Appellate Court Distinguishes Case from Earlier Moorehead Decision: No Loss of Use of Trucker’s Legs Where He May Have Survived Wreck for Brief Period of Time Ohio: Appellate Court Distinguishes Case from Earlier Moorehead Decision: No Loss of Use of Trucker’s Legs Where He May Have Survived Wreck for Brief Period of Time
Mar 19, 2013

Ohio: Truck Driver’s Termination For Causing Accident in Which He Sustained Injuries Does Not Disqualify Him From TTD Benefits

In State ex rel. Haddox v. Industrial Comm’n, 2013 Ohio 794, 2013 Ohio LEXIS 618 (Mar. 12, 2013), the Supreme Court of Ohio recently affirmed an appellate court’s decision that...

Ohio: Truck Driver’s Termination For Causing Accident in Which He Sustained Injuries Does Not Disqualify Him From TTD Benefits Ohio: Truck Driver’s Termination For Causing Accident in Which He Sustained Injuries Does Not Disqualify Him From TTD Benefits
Feb 24, 2013

Washington: School Custodian’s Tort Claim Against Employer for PTSD Resulting From Clean-up Duties Following Student’s Suicide Is Barred by Exclusivity

Last Thursday, a Washington state appellate court affirmed the dismissal of a civil action filed by a school custodian against her employer, a school district and its superintendent, alleging intentional...

Washington: School Custodian’s Tort Claim Against Employer for PTSD Resulting From Clean-up Duties Following Student’s Suicide Is Barred by Exclusivity Washington: School Custodian’s Tort Claim Against Employer for PTSD Resulting From Clean-up Duties Following Student’s Suicide Is Barred by Exclusivity
Feb 23, 2013

New York: Mechanic’s Fatal Heart Attack Sustained on Employer’s Premises, But After Work Shift, Held Not Compensable

A New York appellate court recently affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that ruled the death of an employee was not causally related to his employment as...

New York: Mechanic’s Fatal Heart Attack Sustained on Employer’s Premises, But After Work Shift, Held Not Compensable New York: Mechanic’s Fatal Heart Attack Sustained on Employer’s Premises, But After Work Shift, Held Not Compensable
Feb 16, 2013

South Carolina: Supreme Court Adopts Larson’s “Dual Persona” Doctrine

Answering a question certified to it by the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, the Supreme Court of South Carolina, in Mendenall v. Anderson Hardwood Floors, Inc.,...

South Carolina: Supreme Court Adopts Larson’s “Dual Persona” Doctrine South Carolina: Supreme Court Adopts Larson’s “Dual Persona” Doctrine
Feb 8, 2013

North Carolina: Intentional Tort Action Against Wal-Mart Related to Death of Wal-Mart “Greeter” Barred by Exclusivity

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeals of North Carolina affirmed a trial court’s order granting various defendants’ motions for summary judgment on exclusivity grounds in a wrongful death action filed...

North Carolina: Intentional Tort Action Against Wal-Mart Related to Death of Wal-Mart “Greeter” Barred by Exclusivity North Carolina: Intentional Tort Action Against Wal-Mart Related to Death of Wal-Mart “Greeter” Barred by Exclusivity

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