Newest Articles

Jun 2, 2026

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity

Court Applies Massachusetts Law to Maine Injury, Rejects Immunity Defense in Multi-State Staffing Arrangement A New Hampshire contractor that likely would have enjoyed workers’ compensation immunity under Maine law lost...

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity
Jun 1, 2026

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions

New York’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed an Appellate Division order blocking defendants in a personal injury action from using a Workers’ Compensation Board causation determination as collateral estoppel, holding...

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions
May 27, 2026

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment

In a case involving a Nebraska truck driver-farm laborer whose treatment for metastatic cancer was allegedly postponed by complications associated with a compensable hip injury and its resulting treatment, the...

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment
May 26, 2026

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke

A North Carolina district manager who suffered a stroke while preparing for the opening of a restaurant location—and who allegedly waited hours before coworkers summoned emergency assistance—may not pursue negligence...

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Oct 16, 2012

US: Injured Employee May Not Sue Insured Iowa Employer For Bad Faith Failure to Pay Workers’ Comp Claim

A federal district court, sitting in Iowa, recently granted an employer’s motion to dismiss an action filed against it by a worker who had asserted that he had been injured...

US: Injured Employee May Not Sue Insured Iowa Employer For Bad Faith Failure to Pay Workers’ Comp Claim US: Injured Employee May Not Sue Insured Iowa Employer For Bad Faith Failure to Pay Workers’ Comp Claim
Oct 15, 2012

Pennsylvania: Injured Worker’s Participation in Employer’s “Special Attrition Plan” Causes a Loss in Disability Benefits

Evidence that an injured worker attended his employer’s “Attrition Plan” meeting and signed forms related to the employer’s “Special Attrition Plan,” that provided for, among other things, a lump sum...

Pennsylvania: Injured Worker’s Participation in Employer’s “Special Attrition Plan” Causes a Loss in Disability Benefits Pennsylvania: Injured Worker’s Participation in Employer’s “Special Attrition Plan” Causes a Loss in Disability Benefits
Oct 8, 2012

Iowa: Lack of “Adequate” Remedy Does Not Mean Exclusive Remedy Provision May Be Circumvented

As observed by Dr. Larson, the exclusiveness defense is part of the quid pro quo by which “the sacrifices and gains of employees and employers are to some extent put...

Iowa: Lack of “Adequate” Remedy Does Not Mean Exclusive Remedy Provision May Be Circumvented Iowa: Lack of “Adequate” Remedy Does Not Mean Exclusive Remedy Provision May Be Circumvented
Oct 3, 2012

New York: By Hiring Illegal Alien, Employer Did Not Give Up Protection Against Third-Party Claims for Contribution and/or Indemnification

In spite of the fact that the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) makes it unlawful to knowingly hire undocumented (illegal) aliens [see 8 U.S.C.S. § 1324a],...

New York: By Hiring Illegal Alien, Employer Did Not Give Up Protection Against Third-Party Claims for Contribution and/or Indemnification New York: By Hiring Illegal Alien, Employer Did Not Give Up Protection Against Third-Party Claims for Contribution and/or Indemnification
Oct 2, 2012

New York: Comp Carrier Entitled to Take Credit Against Future Benefits for Rape Victim’s Settlement Against Employer and Co-Employees

A workers’ compensation carrier, who paid benefits to an aide at a juvenile detention center who was physically assaulted, raped, and kidnapped is entitled to take a dollar-for-dollar credit against...

New York: Comp Carrier Entitled to Take Credit Against Future Benefits for Rape Victim’s Settlement Against Employer and Co-Employees New York: Comp Carrier Entitled to Take Credit Against Future Benefits for Rape Victim’s Settlement Against Employer and Co-Employees
Sep 27, 2012

Kentucky: Electric Cooperative Shielded From Tort Action Filed by Dependents of Deceased Employee of Subcontractor–The Fact That Ice Storm Overwhelmed Resources of Coop Did Not Mean Repair Work Was Not Part of Coop’s “Normal” Business

All but a handful of states have “statutory-employer” or “contractor-under” provisions within their workers’ compensation laws that make a general contractor liable for compensation to the employee of a subcontractor–usually...

Kentucky: Electric Cooperative Shielded From Tort Action Filed by Dependents of Deceased Employee of Subcontractor–The Fact That Ice Storm Overwhelmed Resources of Coop Did Not Mean Repair Work Was Not Part of Coop’s “Normal” Business Kentucky: Electric Cooperative Shielded From Tort Action Filed by Dependents of Deceased Employee of Subcontractor–The Fact That Ice Storm Overwhelmed Resources of Coop Did Not Mean Repair Work Was Not Part of Coop’s “Normal” Business
Sep 25, 2012

South Carolina: Injured Crane Operator’s Confident Testimony that He Could Run a Restaurant Did Not Constitute Substantial Evidence That He Had Not Proved Wage Loss

Testimony by an injured crane operator that he was interested in opening a restaurant was too speculative to support the full commission’s finding that the crane operator had not proved...

South Carolina: Injured Crane Operator’s Confident Testimony that He Could Run a Restaurant Did Not Constitute Substantial Evidence That He Had Not Proved Wage Loss South Carolina: Injured Crane Operator’s Confident Testimony that He Could Run a Restaurant Did Not Constitute Substantial Evidence That He Had Not Proved Wage Loss
Sep 24, 2012

Ohio: Total Loss of Use of Rotator Cuff Does Not Mean Loss of Use of Arm

In Ohio, with the exceptions of hearing and sight, scheduled loss compensation was originally limited to amputation. More recently, however, (see State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. Johnson, 128 Ohio...

Ohio: Total Loss of Use of Rotator Cuff Does Not Mean Loss of Use of Arm Ohio: Total Loss of Use of Rotator Cuff Does Not Mean Loss of Use of Arm
Sep 20, 2012

Kentucky: “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished”–Injured Volunteer Firefighter Gets no PD Award Since, After Lay-off, He Had No Wages From Which Benefits Could Be Computed

The Kentucky Court of Appeals sent a not so subtle message to any volunteer firefighter within the state who has been laid off from his or her regular employment during...

Kentucky: “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished”–Injured Volunteer Firefighter Gets no PD Award Since, After Lay-off, He Had No Wages From Which Benefits Could Be Computed Kentucky: “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished”–Injured Volunteer Firefighter Gets no PD Award Since, After Lay-off, He Had No Wages From Which Benefits Could Be Computed
Sep 7, 2012

South Carolina: Exotic Dancer Shot in Strip Club Brawl Was Not an Employee–No Workers’ Compensation Benefits

An exotic dancer, who worked in various “strip” clubs in North and South Carolina, and who was shot and seriously wounded while performing at the Boom Boom Room Studio 54...

South Carolina: Exotic Dancer Shot in Strip Club Brawl Was Not an Employee–No Workers’ Compensation Benefits South Carolina: Exotic Dancer Shot in Strip Club Brawl Was Not an Employee–No Workers’ Compensation Benefits
Sep 5, 2012

Maryland: Expert Testimony Linking Employees’ “Sick Building” Syndrome to Workplace Not Admissible

A Maryland appellate court recently reversed a trial court’s decision that would have allowed testimony by a physician related to claims by various employees that they had sustained an accidental...

Maryland: Expert Testimony Linking Employees’ “Sick Building” Syndrome to Workplace Not Admissible Maryland: Expert Testimony Linking Employees’ “Sick Building” Syndrome to Workplace Not Admissible
Sep 3, 2012

Missouri: Boyfriend’s Murder of Employee Did Not Arise From the Employment; Wrongful Death Action Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine

Last Friday, a Missouri appellate court reversed a decision by a state trial court that had sustained a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death action filed against...

Missouri: Boyfriend’s Murder of Employee Did Not Arise From the Employment; Wrongful Death Action Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine Missouri: Boyfriend’s Murder of Employee Did Not Arise From the Employment; Wrongful Death Action Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine

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