Newest Articles

Jul 21, 2026

Utah High Court: Suspension, Not Dismissal, Is the Only Sanction for Obstructing an IME

Statute’s Specific Remedy Overrides Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions, Even After Three Failed Medical Exams The Supreme Court of Utah has held that dismissal is not an available sanction for a...

Utah High Court: Suspension, Not Dismissal, Is the Only Sanction for Obstructing an IME Utah High Court: Suspension, Not Dismissal, Is the Only Sanction for Obstructing an IME
Jul 16, 2026

Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break

PA Court Finds a 15-Minute Break’s Brevity Outweighs Its Formality The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania recently affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to a pharmacy technician struck by a...

Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break Personal Comfort Doctrine Reaches a Formal, Unpaid Break
Jul 14, 2026

Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field

Idaho Federal Court Finds Surveillance and a Full-Duty Release Defeat Workers' Comp Retaliatory Discharge Claim The U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho recently granted summary judgment for a...

Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field Trucker’s Retaliation Claim Runs Aground in His Own Hay Field
Jul 13, 2026

FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims

Risk-Exposure Evidence Alone Can Establish the Causal Link, Justices Hold Last Thursday, In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Muñiz, the Supreme Court of Florida held that a workplace assault...

FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims FL High Court Rejects Motive Requirement for Workplace Assault Claims

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Jun 22, 2021

Colorado Hospital’s Action in Billing Claimant for Medical Services Warranted Penalty, But Not as a “Continuing” Offense

A Colorado appellate court affirmed the imposition of a $750 penalty for each of eight instances in which a hospital sent invoices to a worker who had sustained work-related injuries...

Colorado Hospital’s Action in Billing Claimant for Medical Services Warranted Penalty, But Not as a “Continuing” Offense Colorado Hospital’s Action in Billing Claimant for Medical Services Warranted Penalty, But Not as a “Continuing” Offense
Jun 21, 2021

NY Law Firm’s $52K Fee Request Will be Reconsidered by Board

In a relatively unusual move, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York (Third Department) vacated its October 8, 2020 decision [reported at 187 A.D.3d 1297, 132 N.Y.S.3d...

NY Law Firm’s $52K Fee Request Will be Reconsidered by Board NY Law Firm’s $52K Fee Request Will be Reconsidered by Board
Jun 17, 2021

NY Grave Digger’s Intentional Distress Claim Fails

A New York appellate court affirmed a trial court’s order granting an employer’s motion for summary judgment in a case in which a former employee—a grave digger—contended he had sustained...

NY Grave Digger’s Intentional Distress Claim Fails NY Grave Digger’s Intentional Distress Claim Fails
Jun 16, 2021

NY Court Examines Applicability of Back-Dated Indemnification Agreement

A New York appellate court affirmed a trial court’s decision denying that portion of an employer/third-party defendant’s motion seeking dismissal of a contractual indemnification claim filed against it by a...

NY Court Examines Applicability of Back-Dated Indemnification Agreement NY Court Examines Applicability of Back-Dated Indemnification Agreement
Jun 15, 2021

NY Jury Must Consider Whether Defendant was Special Employee Entitled to Exclusive Remedy Defense

A New York appellate court affirmed a trial court’s determination that there were issues of fact as to whether a defendant was the special employee of plaintiff’s employer so as...

NY Jury Must Consider Whether Defendant was Special Employee Entitled to Exclusive Remedy Defense NY Jury Must Consider Whether Defendant was Special Employee Entitled to Exclusive Remedy Defense
Jun 10, 2021

Action Filed Under NJ’s Discrimination Law Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Rule

The Supreme Court of New Jersey, examining the intersection between the state’s Worker’s Compensation Act (WCA) and its Law Against Discrimination (LAD), held that a teacher’s LAD claim alleging that...

Action Filed Under NJ’s Discrimination Law Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Rule Action Filed Under NJ’s Discrimination Law Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Rule
Jun 9, 2021

Intentional Injury Action Against Co-Employees Fails Under Alabama’s Substantially Certain Rule

Applying Alabama’s intentional injury exception to the exclusive remedy rule, the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed a trial court’s decision granting two co-employee defendants summary judgment in a civil action...

Intentional Injury Action Against Co-Employees Fails Under Alabama’s Substantially Certain Rule Intentional Injury Action Against Co-Employees Fails Under Alabama’s Substantially Certain Rule
Jun 8, 2021

ND High Court Stresses That Heart Attacks Only Compensable When Caused by Unusual Stress

Construing the state’s special statute limiting the compensability of heart attacks, stroke, and physical injury caused by mental stimulus, a divided Supreme Court of North Dakota reversed an ALJ’s decision...

ND High Court Stresses That Heart Attacks Only Compensable When Caused by Unusual Stress ND High Court Stresses That Heart Attacks Only Compensable When Caused by Unusual Stress
Jun 7, 2021

Ex Parte Communications Sink NY Death Benefits Claim

Showing just how serious New York courts take the issue of ex parte communications between counsel and medical experts, a New York appellate court recently affirmed an order by the...

Ex Parte Communications Sink NY Death Benefits Claim Ex Parte Communications Sink NY Death Benefits Claim
Jun 3, 2021

NY Claimant’s Failure to Disclose Gambling Activities Constitutes § 114-a Violation

A New York appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that not only imposed the mandatory penalty rescinding the claimant’s award of workers’ compensation benefits, but...

NY Claimant’s Failure to Disclose Gambling Activities Constitutes § 114-a Violation NY Claimant’s Failure to Disclose Gambling Activities Constitutes § 114-a Violation
Jun 2, 2021

$15K “Fine” Against Florida Comp Insurer Not Supported by Evidence

In an appeal and cross-appeal from an order granting sanctions against an insurer for failure to provide orthopedic treatment to an injured worker, a Florida appellate court held that a...

$15K “Fine” Against Florida Comp Insurer Not Supported by Evidence $15K “Fine” Against Florida Comp Insurer Not Supported by Evidence
Jun 1, 2021

PA Court: Carefully Planned Suicide Still Compensable

Decision is Consistent with Majority Rule In a holding that is consistent with the dominant rule among American jurisdictions, a Pennsylvania appellate court recently affirmed a Board decision that awarded...

PA Court: Carefully Planned Suicide Still Compensable PA Court: Carefully Planned Suicide Still Compensable

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