ARTICLES - Page 36 of 130 - WorkComp Writer

Newest Articles

Three Elements, Not Four

Three Elements, Not Four Three Elements, Not Four

Case comment

Oct 7, 2026

Two Boxes Checked “No”

LA Second Circuit Affirms Forfeiture for False Answers on Pre-Hire Questionnaires About Prior Work Accidents and a Recommended Surgery Louisiana’s Second Circuit Court of Appeal has affirmed a ruling that...

Two Boxes Checked “No” Two Boxes Checked “No”

Case comment

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

Case comment

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

Case comment

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

Case comment

All Articles

Issue Commentary: Is Firing Retaliatory Where Injury Prevents Return to Work?

Issue Commentary: Is Firing Retaliatory Where Injury Prevents Return to Work? Issue Commentary: Is Firing Retaliatory Where Injury Prevents Return to Work?

Issue commentary

Apr 11, 2023

Iowa High Court Required to Resort to 100-Year-Old Precedent in Spousal “Abandonment” Case

Iowa High Court Required to Resort to 100-Year-Old Precedent in Spousal “Abandonment” Case Iowa High Court Required to Resort to 100-Year-Old Precedent in Spousal “Abandonment” Case

Case comment

Apr 10, 2023

Issue Commentary: After 32 Years, NC Courts Still Struggle with “Substantial Certainty” Test

Issue Commentary: After 32 Years, NC Courts Still Struggle with “Substantial Certainty” Test Issue Commentary: After 32 Years, NC Courts Still Struggle with “Substantial Certainty” Test

Issue commentary

Apr 4, 2023

Assailant Can Formulate “Intent” to Injure Employee in Spite of His Mental Illness

Assailant Can Formulate “Intent” to Injure Employee in Spite of His Mental Illness Assailant Can Formulate “Intent” to Injure Employee in Spite of His Mental Illness

Case comment

Apr 3, 2023

Issue Commentary: Courts Are Mixed in Deciding Compensability of COVID-19 Without Aid of Presumptions

Issue Commentary: Courts Are Mixed in Deciding Compensability of COVID-19 Without Aid of Presumptions Issue Commentary: Courts Are Mixed in Deciding Compensability of COVID-19 Without Aid of Presumptions

Issue commentary

Mar 27, 2023

Issue Commentary: Employer’s Liability for Post-Injury Medical Treatment

Issue Commentary: Employer’s Liability for Post-Injury Medical Treatment Issue Commentary: Employer’s Liability for Post-Injury Medical Treatment

Mar 23, 2023

Worker’s Failure to Accommodate Action is Not Barred by Exclusivity

Worker’s Failure to Accommodate Action is Not Barred by Exclusivity Worker’s Failure to Accommodate Action is Not Barred by Exclusivity

Case comment

Mar 21, 2023

Issue Commentary: Uber and Postmates Win Skirmish in California War Over Independent Contractor Status

Issue Commentary: Uber and Postmates Win Skirmish in California War Over Independent Contractor Status Issue Commentary: Uber and Postmates Win Skirmish in California War Over Independent Contractor Status

Issue commentary

Mar 20, 2023

Issue Commentary: PA’s Commonwealth Court Parses Words to Require Employer/Carrier to Pay for Medical Marijuana

Issue Commentary: PA’s Commonwealth Court Parses Words to Require Employer/Carrier to Pay for Medical Marijuana Issue Commentary: PA’s Commonwealth Court Parses Words to Require Employer/Carrier to Pay for Medical Marijuana

Issue commentary

Mar 14, 2023

California Appellate Court Reinstates Most of Proposition 22

California Appellate Court Reinstates Most of Proposition 22 California Appellate Court Reinstates Most of Proposition 22

Case comment

Mar 13, 2023

KY High Court Adopts New “Economic Realities” Test for Determining Employee Status

KY High Court Adopts New “Economic Realities” Test for Determining Employee Status KY High Court Adopts New “Economic Realities” Test for Determining Employee Status

Case comment

Mar 9, 2023

Strict Arkansas Statute Does Not Bar Recovery for Nurse’s Slip and Fall During Lunch Break

Strict Arkansas Statute Does Not Bar Recovery for Nurse’s Slip and Fall During Lunch Break Strict Arkansas Statute Does Not Bar Recovery for Nurse’s Slip and Fall During Lunch Break

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