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

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