Newest Articles

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
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
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
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

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Aug 19, 2021

MN High Court Says Injured Worker Failed to Establish Exception Allowing Long-Term Opioid Use

In a carefully crafted decision dealing with a chronic problem both within and without the workers’ compensation world—long-term opioid use—the Supreme Court of Minnesota held an injured workers treatment with...

MN High Court Says Injured Worker Failed to Establish Exception Allowing Long-Term Opioid Use MN High Court Says Injured Worker Failed to Establish Exception Allowing Long-Term Opioid Use
Aug 17, 2021

Delaware Worker’s Running in Workplace Bars Claim for Injuries

Construing 19 Del. C. § 2353(b), which bars an employee’s right to compensation for an injury if the injury results, inter alia, from “the employee’s deliberate and reckless indifference to...

Delaware Worker’s Running in Workplace Bars Claim for Injuries Delaware Worker’s Running in Workplace Bars Claim for Injuries
Aug 9, 2021

Utah IME Physician May Not Be Sued by Workers’ Comp Claimant

Finding that a physician-patient relationship did not exist between a doctor hired by the workers’ compensation carrier to perform an independent medical examination of the claimant, the Supreme Court of...

Utah IME Physician May Not Be Sued by Workers’ Comp Claimant Utah IME Physician May Not Be Sued by Workers’ Comp Claimant
Aug 5, 2021

Half of Virginia Claimant’s PPD Apportioned to Pre-Existing Condition

In a decision not designated for publication, a Virginia appellate court affirmed a finding of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that an injured employee’s work-related accident had caused only a...

Half of Virginia Claimant’s PPD Apportioned to Pre-Existing Condition Half of Virginia Claimant’s PPD Apportioned to Pre-Existing Condition
Jul 29, 2021

Virginia Claimant Did Not Violate Known Safety Rule in Connection with Injury

Construing Virginia’s intentional violation of a known safety rule statute [Va. Code § 65.2-306(A)], a state appellate court affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to an employee who sustained...

Virginia Claimant Did Not Violate Known Safety Rule in Connection with Injury Virginia Claimant Did Not Violate Known Safety Rule in Connection with Injury
Jul 27, 2021

NY Court Agrees Claimant’s Injuries Occurred Within “Gray Area” of Employment

Reiterating New York’s special “gray area” rule, pursuant to which injuries sustained in public areas near the employment—but not on the employer’s premises—are nevertheless compensable where the risks of street...

NY Court Agrees Claimant’s Injuries Occurred Within “Gray Area” of Employment NY Court Agrees Claimant’s Injuries Occurred Within “Gray Area” of Employment
Jul 26, 2021

Surviving Spouse Fails to Show Causal Connection Between NY Injury and Decedent’s Subsequent Death

A New York appellate court affirmed a determination by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that the surviving spouse of a deceased worker failed to establish—by competent medical evidence—that his wife’s...

Surviving Spouse Fails to Show Causal Connection Between NY Injury and Decedent’s Subsequent Death Surviving Spouse Fails to Show Causal Connection Between NY Injury and Decedent’s Subsequent Death
Jul 23, 2021

PA Claimant’s Benefits Terminated: 18 Months of Home Remedies Did Not Constitute Medical Treatment

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court held a WCJ appropriately relied upon the medical opinion of the employer’s examining physician in which the doctor opined that the workers’ compensation claimant had made...

PA Claimant’s Benefits Terminated: 18 Months of Home Remedies Did Not Constitute Medical Treatment PA Claimant’s Benefits Terminated: 18 Months of Home Remedies Did Not Constitute Medical Treatment
Jul 20, 2021

NY Worker Fails to Establish Claim for Lyme Disease

A New York appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that denied a claim for consequential Lyme disease in spite of an opinion offered by an...

NY Worker Fails to Establish Claim for Lyme Disease NY Worker Fails to Establish Claim for Lyme Disease
Jul 19, 2021

Ohio Home Health Aide’s Injuries Outside Client’s Residence Not Compensable

An Ohio appellate court affirmed the denial of workers’ compensation benefits to a home health care aide who sustained a T12 vertebrae compression fracture when she slipped and fell on...

Ohio Home Health Aide’s Injuries Outside Client’s Residence Not Compensable Ohio Home Health Aide’s Injuries Outside Client’s Residence Not Compensable
Jul 14, 2021

Virginia Worker’s Fall on Workplace Steps is Not Compensable

A Virginia appellate court, yet again reiterating the state’s version of the “actual risk rule” [see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 3.04] affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation...

Virginia Worker’s Fall on Workplace Steps is Not Compensable Virginia Worker’s Fall on Workplace Steps is Not Compensable
Jul 12, 2021

AZ Police Officer’s PTSD Claim Fails Since Stress was not Unexpected

In a split decision, an Arizona appellate court affirmed a finding by the state’s Industrial Commission that a police officer failed to establish a compensable workers’ compensation claim based on...

AZ Police Officer’s PTSD Claim Fails Since Stress was not Unexpected AZ Police Officer’s PTSD Claim Fails Since Stress was not Unexpected

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