Newest Articles

Jan 6, 2025

Iowa Court Affirms Denial of Benefits re: COVID-19 Claim

In Collins v. Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority (DART), 2024 Iowa App. LEXIS 918 (Dec. 18, 2024), the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed denial of workers’ compensation benefits to...

Iowa Court Affirms Denial of Benefits re: COVID-19 Claim Iowa Court Affirms Denial of Benefits re: COVID-19 Claim
Jan 6, 2025

Nebraska COVID-19 Claim Fails For Want of Expert Medical Evidence

In Spisa-Kline v. Mary Lanning Memorial Hospital, 2024 Neb. App. LEXIS 750 (Dec. 31, 2024), the Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the employer in a workers’ compensation...

Nebraska COVID-19 Claim Fails For Want of Expert Medical Evidence Nebraska COVID-19 Claim Fails For Want of Expert Medical Evidence
Dec 31, 2024

Oregon Jaywalker Might Be Awarded Benefits

Appeals Court Examines Going and Coming Rule The Oregon Court of Appeals has reversed and remanded a Workers’ Compensation Board decision that had denied benefits to a worker injured while...

Oregon Jaywalker Might Be Awarded Benefits Oregon Jaywalker Might Be Awarded Benefits
Dec 30, 2024

NC Court of Appeals Reverses $28.9 Million Tort Judgment

Insurer Had No Duty to Defend Intentional Tort Claim Against Co-Employee In Ortez v. Penn Nat’l Sec. Ins. Co., 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 1017 (Dec. 17, 2024), the North Carolina...

NC Court of Appeals Reverses $28.9 Million Tort Judgment NC Court of Appeals Reverses $28.9 Million Tort Judgment

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Oct 11, 2022

No Violation of N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 114-a Where Testimony Inconsistencies Explained by Head Injury

A New York appellate court affirmed a finding of a state WCLJ, affirmed by the New York Workers’ Compensation Board, that a claimant had not made misrepresentations regarding his prior...

No Violation of N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 114-a Where Testimony Inconsistencies Explained by Head Injury No Violation of N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 114-a Where Testimony Inconsistencies Explained by Head Injury
Oct 4, 2022

NY Claimant Entitled to Marked Permanent Disability Award Instead of SLU Award

Construing the N.Y. Workers’ Compensation Guidelines for Determining Impairment, a state appellate court affirmed a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board that held an injured employee’s foot injury was not...

NY Claimant Entitled to Marked Permanent Disability Award Instead of SLU Award NY Claimant Entitled to Marked Permanent Disability Award Instead of SLU Award
Oct 3, 2022

Failure to Disclose Earnings From Home-Based Business is Violation of NY Fraud Statute

Where a New York workers’ compensation claimant testified that he had not worked after a specific date and also represented to a carrier’s medical consultant that he had stopped working...

Failure to Disclose Earnings From Home-Based Business is Violation of NY Fraud Statute Failure to Disclose Earnings From Home-Based Business is Violation of NY Fraud Statute
Sep 29, 2022

Injuries Sustained by MS Worker in Fight Over Country Music Not Compensable

In a case with a bizarre fact pattern, a Mississippi appellate court affirmed the denial of workers’ compensation benefits to a worker who sustained injuries in a workplace altercation [Hollis...

Injuries Sustained by MS Worker in Fight Over Country Music Not Compensable Injuries Sustained by MS Worker in Fight Over Country Music Not Compensable
Sep 27, 2022

NC Court Affirms Death Benefits Award Under State’s “Found Dead” Presumption

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina, construing the state’s version of the “found dead” rule, affirmed a decision by the state’s Industrial Commission that awarded death benefits to the...

NC Court Affirms Death Benefits Award Under State’s “Found Dead” Presumption NC Court Affirms Death Benefits Award Under State’s “Found Dead” Presumption
Sep 21, 2022

Illinois Employee’s Termination Not Retaliatory Where it Occurred Six Weeks Prior to His Filing Comp Claim

Where an Illinois employee failed to indicate to his employer that his absence from work was due to an alleged work-related injury and he filed his workers’ compensation claim six...

Illinois Employee’s Termination Not Retaliatory Where it Occurred Six Weeks Prior to His Filing Comp Claim Illinois Employee’s Termination Not Retaliatory Where it Occurred Six Weeks Prior to His Filing Comp Claim
Sep 19, 2022

NC Employer May Not Use Truck Driver’s “Misconduct” in Causing Accident as Excuse for Denying TTD Benefits

Where a North Carolina truck driver was terminated from employment because the employer determined that the driver had been at fault in causing an accident that resulted in his injuries,...

NC Employer May Not Use Truck Driver’s “Misconduct” in Causing Accident as Excuse for Denying TTD Benefits NC Employer May Not Use Truck Driver’s “Misconduct” in Causing Accident as Excuse for Denying TTD Benefits
Sep 12, 2022

Virginia Worker’s Post-Injury Decision to be “Off-Work” Due to COVID-19 Sinks TTD Claim

A Virginia part-time employee, who was able to work without restrictions for three months, following a work-related injury, and who then was “taken off work” by his cardiologist because of...

Virginia Worker’s Post-Injury Decision to be “Off-Work” Due to COVID-19 Sinks TTD Claim Virginia Worker’s Post-Injury Decision to be “Off-Work” Due to COVID-19 Sinks TTD Claim
Aug 31, 2022

New Mexico Court Discusses State’s “Peculiar” Going and Coming Rule

In an unusual case that turned on the “peculiar” wording of New Mexico’s statutory going and coming rule, the Court of Appeals of New Mexico affirmed a decision by a...

New Mexico Court Discusses State’s “Peculiar” Going and Coming Rule New Mexico Court Discusses State’s “Peculiar” Going and Coming Rule
Aug 30, 2022

Employee Recovers for Idiopathic Fall Under Louisiana’s Positional Risk Doctrine

A Louisiana appellate court recently affirmed a determination by a WCJ that a pharmacy technician’s injuries resulting from a fall at her computer station after she had suffered a one-time...

Employee Recovers for Idiopathic Fall Under Louisiana’s Positional Risk Doctrine Employee Recovers for Idiopathic Fall Under Louisiana’s Positional Risk Doctrine
Aug 29, 2022

Ohio Court Stresses Not All Employer Parking Lot Injuries are Compensable

In a recent decision that outlines and clarifies several important issues related to injuries in an employer-owned or controlled parking lot, an Ohio appellate court reversed a trial court’s determination...

Ohio Court Stresses Not All Employer Parking Lot Injuries are Compensable Ohio Court Stresses Not All Employer Parking Lot Injuries are Compensable
Aug 10, 2022

Signed Mediation Agreement Binds Employer/Carrier to $1 Million Payment in Spite of Worker’s Death Seven Days After Mediation

Observing that after a 2007 amendment to S.C Code § 42-9-390, an agreement settling a workers’ compensation dispute no longer had to be approved by the Commission if both parties...

Signed Mediation Agreement Binds Employer/Carrier to $1 Million Payment in Spite of Worker’s Death Seven Days After Mediation Signed Mediation Agreement Binds Employer/Carrier to $1 Million Payment in Spite of Worker’s Death Seven Days After Mediation

New Comments

  • 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
  • Thomas A. Robinson: Good point, although the interesting thing about the case--at least to me--is that it discusses the important "injury by accident" issue. That issue, present in at least a plurality of state acts, is largely ignored by Commissions, Boards, and Courts these days. Here, also, the case was so fact-specific that even it had been issued as published, it would be factually distinguishable from many othe...
  • kathlyn gorman: It should have been noted in your discussion that this is an unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Thus, it does not constitute controlling legal authority.
  • Thomas A. Robinson: You're correct. Ordinarily, I can depend upon Alabama to provide me with at least one case for "the List." I'll bet 2022 will unearth something bizarre from the Great State of Alabama. Take care.