Newest Articles

Oct 5, 2026

Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee

LA Fourth Circuit, 3–2, Holds Dump-Truck Driver Paid 25% of Truck Earnings Was an Employee Despite 1099; Dissent Invokes Manifest-Error Review The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit recently reversed...

Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee
Sep 29, 2026

Alcohol Falls Outside KY’s Presumption of Causation

KY Supreme Court Holds the Statutory Presumption Against Recovery for Intoxicating Substances Does Not Apply to Alcohol The Kentucky Supreme Court has affirmed benefits for a traffic flagger who was...

Alcohol Falls Outside KY’s Presumption of Causation Alcohol Falls Outside KY’s Presumption of Causation
Sep 28, 2026

The Heart Has Wiring, Too

FL First DCA Holds Harlem’s Narrow “Heart Disease” Definition Does Not Bar a Firefighter’s Arrhythmia Claim Under the Heart-Lung Presumption Florida’s First District Court of Appeal has affirmed an award...

The Heart Has Wiring, Too The Heart Has Wiring, Too
Sep 24, 2026

“Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New

Oregon Court Applies New Claim-Closure Requirements to Case Pending on Judicial Review The Oregon Court of Appeals has held that 2022 amendments limiting retroactive “medically stationary” determinations apply to a...

“Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New “Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New

All Articles

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

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