Newest Articles

Jul 16, 2026

Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break

PA Court Finds a 15-Minute Break’s Brevity Outweighs Its Formality The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania recently affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to a pharmacy technician struck by a...

Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break
Jul 14, 2026

Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field

Idaho Federal Court Finds Surveillance and a Full-Duty Release Defeat Workers' Comp Retaliatory Discharge Claim The U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho recently granted summary judgment for a...

Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field
Jul 13, 2026

FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims

Risk-Exposure Evidence Alone Can Establish the Causal Link, Justices Hold Last Thursday, In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Muñiz, the Supreme Court of Florida held that a workplace assault...

FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims
Jul 8, 2026

KY Court Revives Tort Claims From Mayfield Candle Factory Tornado Deaths

Supervisors Who Allegedly Blocked Exits Fell Outside the Workers’ Comp Act’s Exclusive Remedy The Kentucky Court of Appeals has revived tort claims brought by survivors of the December 2021 tornado...

KY Court Revives Tort Claims From Mayfield Candle Factory Tornado Deaths KY Court Revives Tort Claims From Mayfield Candle Factory Tornado Deaths

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
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
Mar 3, 2025

PA Court Rules on COVID-19 “E-Time” Payments in Workers’ Comp Case

In a recent Pennsylvania workers’ compensation case, the state’s Commonwealth Court ruled that pandemic-related “excused time” payments, such as Philadelphia’s “E-Time” program, do not constitute “payments in lieu of compensation”...

PA Court Rules on COVID-19 “E-Time” Payments in Workers’ Comp Case PA Court Rules on COVID-19 “E-Time” Payments in Workers’ Comp Case
Feb 27, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Waters v. William J. Taylor Co. (1916) – The Humanitarian Rescue Doctrine

Background In 1916, the New York Court of Appeals issued a groundbreaking decision that would fundamentally shape how workers’ compensation law treats rescue attempts. The case, Waters v. William J....

Throwback Thursday: Waters v. William J. Taylor Co. (1916) – The Humanitarian Rescue Doctrine Throwback Thursday: Waters v. William J. Taylor Co. (1916) – The Humanitarian Rescue Doctrine
Feb 26, 2025

Florida Court Nixes Worker’s Comp Award for Spouse’s Household Chores

Yesterday, in Girardin v. An Fort Myers Imps., LLC (2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, Feb. 19, 2025), Florida’s First District Court of Appeal struck down an award for attendant care...

Florida Court Nixes Worker’s Comp Award for Spouse’s Household Chores Florida Court Nixes Worker’s Comp Award for Spouse’s Household Chores
Feb 20, 2025

Throwback Thursday: Krause v. Swartwood (1928) – When Lunch is Part of the Job

Background In 1928, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a decision that would help establish important principles about when off-premises lunch injuries fall within the scope of workers’ compensation coverage. The...

Throwback Thursday: Krause v. Swartwood (1928) – When Lunch is Part of the Job Throwback Thursday: Krause v. Swartwood (1928) – When Lunch is Part of the Job
Feb 19, 2025

NY Court Upholds Permanent Benefits Ban Based on Surveillance Evidence

In a decision that reinforces the potential consequences of misrepresenting one’s physical condition, a New York appellate court has upheld the permanent disqualification from wage replacement benefits of a workers’...

NY Court Upholds Permanent Benefits Ban Based on Surveillance Evidence NY Court Upholds Permanent Benefits Ban Based on Surveillance Evidence
Feb 18, 2025

Drug Test Delay Dooms Kansas Employer’s Attempt to Deny Benefits

In an unpublished decision, a Kansas appellate court has struck down an employer’s attempt to deny workers’ compensation benefits to an employee who refused a drug test 18 days after...

Drug Test Delay Dooms Kansas Employer’s Attempt to Deny Benefits Drug Test Delay Dooms Kansas Employer’s Attempt to Deny Benefits

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