Newest Articles

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 No...

NC Court of Appeals Reverses $28.9 Million Tort Judgment NC Court of Appeals Reverses $28.9 Million Tort Judgment
Dec 27, 2024

NY: Adverse Reaction to COVID Vaccination Not Compensable

Employer Encouraged, But Did Not Require Inoculation A New York appellate court has affirmed the state Workers’ Compensation Board’s denial of benefits to a hea...

NY: Adverse Reaction to COVID Vaccination Not Compensable NY: Adverse Reaction to COVID Vaccination Not Compensable
Dec 20, 2024

PA Commonwealth Court Says No Credit Allowed for Pension Benefits Provided by Employer to Injured Retiree

In Bradford County v. Pasko, 323 A.3d 39 (Pa. Commw. 2024), the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed a Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board decision that deni...

PA Commonwealth Court Says No Credit Allowed for Pension Benefits Provided by Employer to Injured Retiree PA Commonwealth Court Says No Credit Allowed for Pension Benefits Provided by Employer to Injured Retiree
Dec 18, 2024

Arkansas Court Reverses Permanent Benefits Award for COVID-Related Heart Condition

The Arkansas Court of Appeals has reversed a workers’ compensation award for permanent impairment related to atrial fibrillation that developed following a COVI...

Arkansas Court Reverses Permanent Benefits Award for COVID-Related Heart Condition Arkansas Court Reverses Permanent Benefits Award for COVID-Related Heart Condition

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Oct 3, 2024

Maine High Court Clarifies When Interest on Specific-Loss Benefits Begins to Accrue for Specific Eye Injuries

In a well-reasoned decision that illustrates the difficulties courts sometime face in balancing competing interests within a workers’ compensation dispute, the ...

Maine High Court Clarifies When Interest on Specific-Loss Benefits Begins to Accrue for Specific Eye Injuries Maine High Court Clarifies When Interest on Specific-Loss Benefits Begins to Accrue for Specific Eye Injuries
Oct 2, 2024

Nebraska High Court: Expert’s Use of “Associated” Was Sufficient to Establish Causation

The Supreme Court of Nebraska recently affirmed an award of benefits to a claimant who alleged respiratory injuries from wearing a UV-sterilized N95 mask at wor...

Nebraska High Court: Expert’s Use of “Associated” Was Sufficient to Establish Causation Nebraska High Court: Expert’s Use of “Associated” Was Sufficient to Establish Causation
Sep 30, 2024

NY: Google Employee’s Post-Happy Hour Accident Arose From Employment

The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently affirmed a state Workers’ Compensation Board decision finding that a Google acc...

NY: Google Employee’s Post-Happy Hour Accident Arose From Employment NY: Google Employee’s Post-Happy Hour Accident Arose From Employment
Sep 27, 2024

Ohio Court Reiterates Unexplained Fall Doctrine

In a decision examining the tricky balance that must be maintained when in unexplained fall claims, the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth Appellate District, reve...

Ohio Court Reiterates Unexplained Fall Doctrine Ohio Court Reiterates Unexplained Fall Doctrine
Sep 24, 2024

Nevada Supreme Court Retreats from Earlier Decisions Related to Subrogation Liens

Overruling, in relevant part, two of its own prior decisions, the Supreme Court of Nevada, construing the state’s workers’ compensation subrogation statute, NRS...

Nevada Supreme Court Retreats from Earlier Decisions Related to Subrogation Liens Nevada Supreme Court Retreats from Earlier Decisions Related to Subrogation Liens
Sep 21, 2024

Pennsylvania Court Affirms Asbestos Claim Outside Workers’ Compensation System

In a significant decision that reinforces the rights of workers with long-latency occupational diseases within the Keystone State, the Superior Court of Pennsyl...

Pennsylvania Court Affirms Asbestos Claim Outside Workers’ Compensation System Pennsylvania Court Affirms Asbestos Claim Outside Workers’ Compensation System

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.