Newest Articles

Jun 3, 2025

Iowa High Court Says Gross Negligence/Fraud Claims Can Go Forward Against Tyson Executives

In an important decision construing the Iowa doctrine that allows gross negligence and fraudulent misrepresentation tort claims against co-employees, the Iowa Supreme Court has revived claims against Tyson Foods executives...

Iowa High Court Says Gross Negligence/Fraud Claims Can Go Forward Against Tyson Executives Iowa High Court Says Gross Negligence/Fraud Claims Can Go Forward Against Tyson Executives
May 29, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Prows v. Industrial Commission of Utah (1980)

A Horseplay Case That Shaped Utah’s Workers’ Compensation Doctrine In Prows v. Industrial Commission of Utah, 610 P.2d 1362 (Utah 1980), the Supreme Court of Utah was presented with a...

Throwback Thursday: Prows v. Industrial Commission of Utah (1980) Throwback Thursday: Prows v. Industrial Commission of Utah (1980)
May 27, 2025

When the Boss Wears Two Hats

Exclusivity Does Not Shield Corporate Officers/Property Owners From Liability as Landlords In Nelson v. Smith, 2025 N.C. App. LEXIS 306 (May 21, 2025), the North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed...

When the Boss Wears Two Hats When the Boss Wears Two Hats
May 22, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Nails v. Market Tire Co. (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1975)

Tools, Timing, and Termination In Nails v. Market Tire Co., 29 Md. App. 154, 347 A.2d 564 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1975), the Maryland Court of Special Appeals addressed a...

Throwback Thursday: Nails v. Market Tire Co. (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1975) Throwback Thursday: Nails v. Market Tire Co. (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1975)

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Feb 2, 2012

Ohio: Cautious Medical Testimony Dooms Death Benefits Claim Related to “Poster Child for Heart Disease”

An Ohio appellate court recently found that medical evidence presented in a death claim case was too speculative to support the required causal connection between a worker’s fatal heart attack...

Ohio: Cautious Medical Testimony Dooms Death Benefits Claim Related to “Poster Child for Heart Disease” Ohio: Cautious Medical Testimony Dooms Death Benefits Claim Related to “Poster Child for Heart Disease”
Jan 27, 2012

“By Accident,” the Oft-Ignored Provision in Workers’ Compensation Law

Virtually every jurisdiction’s comp act has a “by accident” provision of some sort in its definition of compensable injury [for an extended discussion, see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 42.01,...

“By Accident,” the Oft-Ignored Provision in Workers’ Compensation Law “By Accident,” the Oft-Ignored Provision in Workers’ Compensation Law
Jan 27, 2012

Nurse Assistant’s Allegations That She Was Fired For Getting Pregnant Cannot Support Emotional Distress Claim Against Former Employer

A Pennsylvania nurse assistant, who claimed she suffered emotional distress when she was fired for getting pregnant, may not pursue her tort claim against the former employer in federal court,...

Nurse Assistant’s Allegations That She Was Fired For Getting Pregnant Cannot Support Emotional Distress Claim Against Former Employer Nurse Assistant’s Allegations That She Was Fired For Getting Pregnant Cannot Support Emotional Distress Claim Against Former Employer
Jan 22, 2012

New York: Apportionment Not Available Between Work-Related Asbestosis and Non-Work-Related Thyroid Cancer in Death Benefits Case

Last Thursday, a New York appellate court recently affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that had determined that a worker’s death was causally related to his employment...

New York: Apportionment Not Available Between Work-Related Asbestosis and Non-Work-Related Thyroid Cancer in Death Benefits Case New York: Apportionment Not Available Between Work-Related Asbestosis and Non-Work-Related Thyroid Cancer in Death Benefits Case
Jan 20, 2012

Virginia Court: Removal of Ankle Prosthesis, Without its Replacement, Does Not Trigger Reopening Statute

Recognizing that no matter how competent and reasonable a commission or board’s determination of a claimant’s medical condition and level of disability might be at the time of a hearing,...

Virginia Court: Removal of Ankle Prosthesis, Without its Replacement, Does Not Trigger Reopening Statute Virginia Court: Removal of Ankle Prosthesis, Without its Replacement, Does Not Trigger Reopening Statute
Jan 14, 2012

Georgia Appellate Court: Effort to Stop Runaway Car is Not a Deviation From the Employment

Last Wednesday, a Georgia appellate court, holding the State Board of Workers’ Compensation had utilized an “erroneous theory” regarding what conduct constitutes a deviation from employment that will bar compensation...

Georgia Appellate Court: Effort to Stop Runaway Car is Not a Deviation From the Employment Georgia Appellate Court: Effort to Stop Runaway Car is Not a Deviation From the Employment
Jan 12, 2012

Arkansas Court Affirms Denial of Benefits; Explosion Caused By Worker’s Marijuana Use

In a split decision, the Arkansas Court of Appeals yesterday affirmed a finding by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that an injured worker failed to rebut the statutory presumption that...

Arkansas Court Affirms Denial of Benefits; Explosion Caused By Worker’s Marijuana Use Arkansas Court Affirms Denial of Benefits; Explosion Caused By Worker’s Marijuana Use
Jan 11, 2012

New York Correctional Facility Superintendent’s Achilles Tendon Injury While Coaching Volleyball Team is Compensable In Spite of Statute Limiting Definition of “Injury”

A New York appellate court, in Nichols v. Hale Creek ASACTC, 2012 N.Y. App. LEXIS 79 (Jan. 5, 2012) has affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to a superintendent...

New York Correctional Facility Superintendent’s Achilles Tendon Injury While Coaching Volleyball Team is Compensable In Spite of Statute Limiting Definition of “Injury” New York Correctional Facility Superintendent’s Achilles Tendon Injury While Coaching Volleyball Team is Compensable In Spite of Statute Limiting Definition of “Injury”
Jan 6, 2012

New York Case Illustrates That Correlation Between Years of Heavy Work and Back Problems Is Insufficient to Support Compensability

A New York decision reported yesterday, Satalino v. Dan’s Supreme Supermarket, 2012 NY Slip Op 86, 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63 (Jan. 5, 2012), illustrates the important distinction between...

New York Case Illustrates That Correlation Between Years of Heavy Work and Back Problems Is Insufficient to Support Compensability New York Case Illustrates That Correlation Between Years of Heavy Work and Back Problems Is Insufficient to Support Compensability
Dec 29, 2011

Ohio Court Nixes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Claim in Spite of Close Ties With Truck Driver’s Compensable Physical Injuries

A divided Ohio appellate court recently affirmed a trial court’s final judgment that denied a dump truck driver’s claim for post traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”) in spite of strong medical...

Ohio Court Nixes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Claim in Spite of Close Ties With Truck Driver’s Compensable Physical Injuries Ohio Court Nixes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Claim in Spite of Close Ties With Truck Driver’s Compensable Physical Injuries
Dec 23, 2011

North Carolina Teacher’s Tort Action Against Principal Who Prankishly Sprayed Her in Face With Fire Extinguisher May Move Forward

In a split decision, the Court of Appeals of North Carolina, in Trivette v. Yount, 2011 N.C. App. LEXIS 2598 (Dec. 20, 2011), has affirmed an order of a state...

North Carolina Teacher’s Tort Action Against Principal Who Prankishly Sprayed Her in Face With Fire Extinguisher May Move Forward North Carolina Teacher’s Tort Action Against Principal Who Prankishly Sprayed Her in Face With Fire Extinguisher May Move Forward
Dec 22, 2011

North Carolina Worker Injured While Retrieving Paycheck Denied Benefits Under “Going and Coming” Rule

A North Carolina appellate court, in Quiroz v. Metropols Statuary, Inc., 2011 N.C. App. LEXIS 2619 (Dec. 20, 2011), recently affirmed a decision by the state’s Industrial Commission that had...

North Carolina Worker Injured While Retrieving Paycheck Denied Benefits Under “Going and Coming” Rule North Carolina Worker Injured While Retrieving Paycheck Denied Benefits Under “Going and Coming” Rule

New Comments

  • 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
  • Thomas A. Robinson: Good point, although the interesting thing about the case--at least to me--is that it discusses the important "injury by accident" issue. That issue, present in at least a plurality of state acts, is largely ignored by Commissions, Boards, and Courts these days. Here, also, the case was so fact-specific that even it had been issued as published, it would be factually distinguishable from many othe...