Newest Articles

South Carolina’s Mental-Injury Paradox

South Carolina’s Mental-Injury Paradox South Carolina’s Mental-Injury Paradox
Case comment
Jun 5, 2026

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician

Many disputes over physician choice in workers’ compensation arise when an injured worker seeks treatment from a doctor of his or her own choosing. Hayes v. Christian Retirement Homes, Inc.,...

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician
Case comment
Jun 2, 2026

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity

Court Applies Massachusetts Law to Maine Injury, Rejects Immunity Defense in Multi-State Staffing Arrangement A New Hampshire contractor that likely would have enjoyed workers’ compensation immunity under Maine law lost...

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity
Issue commentary
Jun 1, 2026

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions

New York’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed an Appellate Division order blocking defendants in a personal injury action from using a Workers’ Compensation Board causation determination as collateral estoppel, holding...

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions
Case comment
May 27, 2026

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment

In a case involving a Nebraska truck driver-farm laborer whose treatment for metastatic cancer was allegedly postponed by complications associated with a compensable hip injury and its resulting treatment, the...

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment
Case comment

All Articles

CATEGORY
ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Jun 12, 2023

Georgia Employer’s List of Panel MDs Must be “Prominently” Displayed, Not Merely “Accessible”

Georgia Employer’s List of Panel MDs Must be “Prominently” Displayed, Not Merely “Accessible” Georgia Employer’s List of Panel MDs Must be “Prominently” Displayed, Not Merely “Accessible”
Case comment
Jun 7, 2023

NY Therapist’s Mild Heart Attack Following Altercation with Supervisor Was Compensable

NY Therapist’s Mild Heart Attack Following Altercation with Supervisor Was Compensable NY Therapist’s Mild Heart Attack Following Altercation with Supervisor Was Compensable
Case comment
Jun 7, 2023

NY Police Sergeant’s Injuries Sustained While Driving from Home to Station Were Compensable under Special Errand Exception

NY Police Sergeant’s Injuries Sustained While Driving from Home to Station Were Compensable under Special Errand Exception NY Police Sergeant’s Injuries Sustained While Driving from Home to Station Were Compensable under Special Errand Exception
Case comment
Jun 5, 2023

NY Employee’s Violation of Employer’s Alcohol Consumption Policy Does Not Bar Claim

NY Employee’s Violation of Employer’s Alcohol Consumption Policy Does Not Bar Claim NY Employee’s Violation of Employer’s Alcohol Consumption Policy Does Not Bar Claim
Case comment
May 30, 2023

Alaska Commission May Not Determine Scope of Treatment for Chiropractor

Alaska Commission May Not Determine Scope of Treatment for Chiropractor Alaska Commission May Not Determine Scope of Treatment for Chiropractor
Case comment
May 28, 2023

Alabama Temp Worker May Not Sue Special Employer in Tort

Alabama Temp Worker May Not Sue Special Employer in Tort Alabama Temp Worker May Not Sue Special Employer in Tort
Case comment
May 21, 2023

Ohio Supreme Court Says Deceased Employee’s Fiancée Might Have Been “Family” Member Entitled to Death Benefits

Ohio Supreme Court Says Deceased Employee’s Fiancée Might Have Been “Family” Member Entitled to Death Benefits Ohio Supreme Court Says Deceased Employee’s Fiancée Might Have Been “Family” Member Entitled to Death Benefits
Case comment
May 9, 2023

Ex Parte Contact With IME Doctor Results in Sanctions Against MS Employer

Ex Parte Contact With IME Doctor Results in Sanctions Against MS Employer Ex Parte Contact With IME Doctor Results in Sanctions Against MS Employer
Case comment
May 8, 2023

North Carolina: “Willful Negligence” Claim Against Co-Employee/Manager Fails

North Carolina: “Willful Negligence” Claim Against Co-Employee/Manager Fails North Carolina: “Willful Negligence” Claim Against Co-Employee/Manager Fails
Case comment
May 2, 2023

Alaska High Court Says Trial Court, Not Jury, Decides Employment Status Issue

Alaska High Court Says Trial Court, Not Jury, Decides Employment Status Issue Alaska High Court Says Trial Court, Not Jury, Decides Employment Status Issue
Case comment
Apr 28, 2023

NY COVID-19 Death Benefits Claim Fails

NY COVID-19 Death Benefits Claim Fails NY COVID-19 Death Benefits Claim Fails
Case comment
Apr 26, 2023

Oregon High Court Says Board’s Order Assessing Penalties Against Comp Insurer Lacked Clarity

Oregon High Court Says Board’s Order Assessing Penalties Against Comp Insurer Lacked Clarity Oregon High Court Says Board’s Order Assessing Penalties Against Comp Insurer Lacked Clarity
Case comment

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