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
Jun 29, 2012

Oregon: Police Lieutenant’s Injuries During Coffee Break Are Compensable

On Wednesday, the Court of Appeals of Oregon, in McDermed v. City of Eugene, 2012 Ore. App. LEXIS 796 (June 27, 2012), affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to...

Oregon: Police Lieutenant’s Injuries During Coffee Break Are Compensable Oregon: Police Lieutenant’s Injuries During Coffee Break Are Compensable
Jun 21, 2012

Ohio: Unpaid Work for Wife’s Business Warranted Forfeiture of Benefits, But Not Finding of Fraudulent Activity

The Supreme Court of Ohio, affirming a decision of a lower level appellate court, recently held that while a claimant could not receive temporary total disability (TTD) benefits for any...

Ohio: Unpaid Work for Wife’s Business Warranted Forfeiture of Benefits, But Not Finding of Fraudulent Activity Ohio: Unpaid Work for Wife’s Business Warranted Forfeiture of Benefits, But Not Finding of Fraudulent Activity
Jun 16, 2012

Missouri: Survivors May Proceed in Tort Against Uninsured Employer After Recovering Workers’ Compensation Benefits From Statutory Employer–No Election of Remedies Problem

In a 4–3 decision, the Supreme Court of Missouri recently reversed the decision of a state trial court that earlier had held a workers’ compensation award against a statutory employer...

Missouri: Survivors May Proceed in Tort Against Uninsured Employer After Recovering Workers’ Compensation Benefits From Statutory Employer–No Election of Remedies Problem Missouri: Survivors May Proceed in Tort Against Uninsured Employer After Recovering Workers’ Compensation Benefits From Statutory Employer–No Election of Remedies Problem
Jun 15, 2012

Virginia: Non-Dependent Relative of Deceased Worker Caught in Catch-22

In the vast majority of states, non-dependent relatives of employees who suffer fatal work-related injuries are caught in a Catch-22. Since most state acts limit workers’ compensation death benefits to...

Virginia: Non-Dependent Relative of Deceased Worker Caught in Catch-22 Virginia: Non-Dependent Relative of Deceased Worker Caught in Catch-22
Jun 8, 2012

Maryland: Supervisor May Be Sued By Co-Employee re: Parking Lot Vehicular Accident

All but four states (Arkansas, Missouri, Maryland, Vermont, plus the Virgin Islands) extend immunity from tort liability not only to the employer, but co-employees, at least as long as the...

Maryland: Supervisor May Be Sued By Co-Employee re: Parking Lot Vehicular Accident Maryland: Supervisor May Be Sued By Co-Employee re: Parking Lot Vehicular Accident
Jun 6, 2012

US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers

An important exception to the exclusive remedy rule relates to intentional injury inflicted by the employer on an employee. Several legal theories have been advanced to support the exception. The...

US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers
May 31, 2012

Missouri: Divided Supreme Court Reverses Award of Benefits to Employee Injured Making Coffee for Herself and Others in the Office Kitchen

The Supreme Court of Missouri, in a split decision, construing the state’s version of the “increased-risk” doctrine, on Tuesday (May 29) reversed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to an...

Missouri: Divided Supreme Court Reverses Award of Benefits to Employee Injured Making Coffee for Herself and Others in the Office Kitchen Missouri: Divided Supreme Court Reverses Award of Benefits to Employee Injured Making Coffee for Herself and Others in the Office Kitchen
May 29, 2012

Virginia: Claimant Awarded Post-Termination PD Benefits; Her Poor Performance Was In Part Tied to Her Compensable Injuries

As noted by Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 84.02 et seq., some of the most complex disability questions arise when the claimant returns to some kind of employment after the...

Virginia: Claimant Awarded Post-Termination PD Benefits; Her Poor Performance Was In Part Tied to Her Compensable Injuries Virginia: Claimant Awarded Post-Termination PD Benefits; Her Poor Performance Was In Part Tied to Her Compensable Injuries
May 25, 2012

Kentucky: Stable Groom, Injured In Auto Accident Returning to Kentucky From New York, Was “Traveling Employee” In Spite of Indefinite Nature of Travel Details

A stable groom for a horse farm, who sustained multiple injuries in an automobile accident that occurred while he rode with a friend back to Kentucky from Saratoga, New York,...

Kentucky: Stable Groom, Injured In Auto Accident Returning to Kentucky From New York, Was “Traveling Employee” In Spite of Indefinite Nature of Travel Details Kentucky: Stable Groom, Injured In Auto Accident Returning to Kentucky From New York, Was “Traveling Employee” In Spite of Indefinite Nature of Travel Details
May 24, 2012

Illinois: Safety Inspectors Are Immune From Tort Liability For Negligent Inspection

An integral and important part of the workers’ compensation “bargain” is the notion that once a workers’ compensation act has become applicable, either through compulsion or election, it affords the...

Illinois: Safety Inspectors Are Immune From Tort Liability For Negligent Inspection Illinois: Safety Inspectors Are Immune From Tort Liability For Negligent Inspection
May 11, 2012

Texas Widow Prevails In Death Claim Case By Showing Husband’s Drug Overdose Could Have Been Caused By Side Effects of Prescription Pain Medication

It is axiomatic in workers’ compensation law that a subsequent injury, whether an aggravation of the original injury or a new and distinct injury, is compensable if it is the...

Texas Widow Prevails In Death Claim Case By Showing Husband’s Drug Overdose Could Have Been Caused By Side Effects of Prescription Pain Medication Texas Widow Prevails In Death Claim Case By Showing Husband’s Drug Overdose Could Have Been Caused By Side Effects of Prescription Pain Medication
May 8, 2012

Oklahoma Opt Out Legislation Fails: A Post Mortem

By Thomas A. Robinson Late last Wednesday evening (April 25th), supporters of a controversial bill that would have allowed some Oklahoma employers to “opt out” of the state’s traditional workers’...

Oklahoma Opt Out Legislation Fails: A Post Mortem Oklahoma Opt Out Legislation Fails: A Post Mortem

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