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
Mar 27, 2025

Throwback Thursday: New York Central R. Co. v. White (1917)

Background The early 20th century saw a seismic shift in how American society approached workplace injuries. Before the widespread adoption of workers' compensation laws, injured workers typically had to sue...

Throwback Thursday: New York Central R. Co. v. White (1917) Throwback Thursday: New York Central R. Co. v. White (1917)
Mar 26, 2025

Routine Disciplinary Meeting Not a Compensable “Accident” Under NC’ Comp Act

In Muse v. Daimler Trucks N. Am., 2025 N.C. App. LEXIS 113 (Mar. 19, 2025), the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the Industrial Commission’s denial of workers’ compensation benefits...

Routine Disciplinary Meeting Not a Compensable “Accident” Under NC’ Comp Act Routine Disciplinary Meeting Not a Compensable “Accident” Under NC’ Comp Act
Mar 25, 2025

CT Supreme Court: Temporary Partial Benefits May Continue After MMI

In what I think is an unprecedented decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court has held that a workers’ compensation commissioner may award ongoing temporary partial incapacity benefits even after a claimant...

CT Supreme Court: Temporary Partial Benefits May Continue After MMI CT Supreme Court: Temporary Partial Benefits May Continue After MMI
Mar 24, 2025

PA Supreme Court Affirms Cannabidiol Reimbursement for Injured Attorney

In a closely watched decision, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the Commonwealth Court’s ruling that a workers’ compensation claimant may be reimbursed for the cost of physician-prescribed cannabidiol (CBD)...

PA Supreme Court Affirms Cannabidiol Reimbursement for Injured Attorney PA Supreme Court Affirms Cannabidiol Reimbursement for Injured Attorney
Mar 20, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Correa v. Waymouth Farms, Inc. (2003)

Background In 2000, Fernando Correa, an undocumented worker employed at Waymouth Farms, Inc., suffered a back injury while lifting a box in the company’s warehouse. His employer initially accepted the...

Throwback Thursday: Correa v. Waymouth Farms, Inc. (2003) Throwback Thursday: Correa v. Waymouth Farms, Inc. (2003)
Mar 18, 2025

NY Appellate Court Reverses Board’s Decision in Death Benefits Case

In Matter of Hanson v. General Electric Co., 2025 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1397 (3d Dept. Mar. 13, 2025), a New York appellate court reversed the Workers’ Compensation Board’s decision...

NY Appellate Court Reverses Board’s Decision in Death Benefits Case NY Appellate Court Reverses Board’s Decision in Death Benefits Case
Mar 17, 2025

California Court Bars Lawsuit Over Volunteer’s Death

In Kuo v. Dublin Unified School District, 2025 Cal. App. LEXIS 147 (Mar. 12, 2025), the First Appellate District (Division Four) of the California Court of Appeal held that because...

California Court Bars Lawsuit Over Volunteer’s Death California Court Bars Lawsuit Over Volunteer’s Death
Mar 13, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Snyder v. Michael’s Stores, Inc. (1997)

Exclusive Remedy and the Independent Injury Exception A cornerstone of workers’ compensation law is the exclusive remedy rule, which generally bars employees and their families from suing an employer in...

Throwback Thursday: Snyder v. Michael’s Stores, Inc. (1997) Throwback Thursday: Snyder v. Michael’s Stores, Inc. (1997)
Mar 12, 2025

Ohio Court Strikes Down Outdated Legal Doctrine in Permanent Disability Case

250312 Ohio Court Strikes Down Outdated Legal Doctrine in Permanent Disability Case Industrial Commission Ordered to Reevaluate Denied PTD Claim Ohio’s Tenth District Court of Appeals recently ruled that the...

Ohio Court Strikes Down Outdated Legal Doctrine in Permanent Disability Case Ohio Court Strikes Down Outdated Legal Doctrine in Permanent Disability Case
Mar 10, 2025

VA Truck Driver’s Assault Following Road Rage Incident Found Compensable

In a decision that reinforces Virginia’s approach to compensability under the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act (“the Act”), the Virginia Court of Appeals has affirmed an award of benefits to a...

VA Truck Driver’s Assault Following Road Rage Incident Found Compensable VA Truck Driver’s Assault Following Road Rage Incident Found Compensable
Mar 6, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Guidry v. Sline Industrial Painters, Inc. (1982)

Background On December 28, 1979, Alcide Guidry, a 53-year-old industrial painter, arrived at work as usual at 7:30 a.m. for Sline Industrial Painters. Assigned with a colleague to paint large...

Throwback Thursday: Guidry v. Sline Industrial Painters, Inc. (1982) Throwback Thursday: Guidry v. Sline Industrial Painters, Inc. (1982)
Mar 4, 2025

California Supreme Court Preserves Maritime Claims for Workers Excluded from LHWCA

In an important decision for maritime law and workers’ rights, the California Supreme Court has ruled that workers excluded from the federal Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) may...

California Supreme Court Preserves Maritime Claims for Workers Excluded from LHWCA California Supreme Court Preserves Maritime Claims for Workers Excluded from LHWCA

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