Newest Articles

Oct 22, 2026

NY PTSD Claim Fails Under Pre-Amendment Stress Standard

Subway Cleaner Who Witnessed a Platform Injury A New York appellate court recently affirmed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision disallowing a subway-station cleaner’s PTSD claim after he witnessed a woman’s...

NY PTSD Claim Fails Under Pre-Amendment Stress Standard NY PTSD Claim Fails Under Pre-Amendment Stress Standard
Oct 20, 2026

Who Made the Firing Decision? Alabama Court Upholds Retaliation Finding

AL Supreme Court: HR’s Role Was a Jury Question The Alabama Supreme Court, by a 5–4 vote, affirmed liability for retaliatory discharge where the evidence permitted a jury to find...

Who Made the Firing Decision? Alabama Court Upholds Retaliation Finding Who Made the Firing Decision? Alabama Court Upholds Retaliation Finding
Oct 19, 2026

Uncertain Cardiac Sequence Does Not Defeat NY Bus Driver’s Claim

NY Bus Driver’s Crash and Arrhythmia A New York appellate court has affirmed a Workers’ Compensation Board finding that a school bus driver’s injuries and death arose out of his...

Uncertain Cardiac Sequence Does Not Defeat NY Bus Driver’s Claim Uncertain Cardiac Sequence Does Not Defeat NY Bus Driver’s Claim
Oct 15, 2026

Safety Rule Defense Fails Where Employer Tolerated Violation

IL Applies Saunders Acquiescence Exception to Footwear Rule An Illinois appellate court, in a decision not designated for full publication, has affirmed an award of benefits to an ice cream...

Safety Rule Defense Fails Where Employer Tolerated Violation Safety Rule Defense Fails Where Employer Tolerated Violation

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