Newest Articles

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
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
Sep 24, 2026

“Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New

Oregon Court Applies New Claim-Closure Requirements to Case Pending on Judicial Review The Oregon Court of Appeals has held that 2022 amendments limiting retroactive “medically stationary” determinations apply to a...

“Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New “Closed” Under Old Rules, Reprocessed Under New
Sep 22, 2026

Whose Work Was Being Done?

Federal Court: Gas Producer That Hired Out Well Casing Is Casing Worker’s Statutory Employer Under Pennsylvania Law A federal district court in Pennsylvania has held that a natural gas producer...

Whose Work Was Being Done? Whose Work Was Being Done?

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
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
May 26, 2026

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke

A North Carolina district manager who suffered a stroke while preparing for the opening of a restaurant location—and who allegedly waited hours before coworkers summoned emergency assistance—may not pursue negligence...

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke
May 21, 2026

Washington Court Allows “Preconception” Negligence Claim Against Employer — Exclusive Remedy Defense Rejected

In a noteworthy decision addressing the intersection of toxic exposure, reproductive injury, and workers’ compensation exclusivity, a Washington state appellate court recently held that a child conceived after an employee’s...

Washington Court Allows “Preconception” Negligence Claim Against Employer — Exclusive Remedy Defense Rejected Washington Court Allows “Preconception” Negligence Claim Against Employer — Exclusive Remedy Defense Rejected
May 18, 2026

Florida Court Rejects Minnesota Immunity Claim

FL’s Professional Athlete Exclusion Dooms Physician’s Use of MN’s exclusivity protection A Florida appellate court has rejected a Florida physician’s attempt to invoke Minnesota workers’ compensation immunity in a wrongful...

Florida Court Rejects Minnesota Immunity Claim Florida Court Rejects Minnesota Immunity Claim
May 14, 2026

Colorado Federal Court Dismisses Flight Attendants’ Tort Claims Against Frontier Airlines

Toxic Fumes, Fraud Allegations, and Workers’ Compensation Exclusivity A federal district court in Colorado has held that workers’ compensation exclusivity barred tort claims brought by flight attendants who allegedly suffered...

Colorado Federal Court Dismisses Flight Attendants’ Tort Claims Against Frontier Airlines Colorado Federal Court Dismisses Flight Attendants’ Tort Claims Against Frontier Airlines
May 13, 2026

MN Supreme Court: Co-employee Immunity Doesn’t Shield Vehicle Owner from Vicarious Liability

The Minnesota Supreme Court has affirmed a court of appeals ruling that the co-employee immunity provision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act does not protect motor vehicle owners from vicarious...

MN Supreme Court: Co-employee Immunity Doesn’t Shield Vehicle Owner from Vicarious Liability MN Supreme Court: Co-employee Immunity Doesn’t Shield Vehicle Owner from Vicarious Liability
May 11, 2026

Florida Rewrites Tolling Rules

Estes and Leighton Decisions Reshape Statute-of-Limitations Analysis in Compensation Cases In a pair of recent decisions, the Florida First District Court of Appeal has overruled more than twenty-five years of...

Florida Rewrites Tolling Rules Florida Rewrites Tolling Rules
May 7, 2026

California Workers’ Comp Costs Continued Upward Trend in 2025, WCRI Study Finds

California workers' compensation costs per claim rose 6 percent in 2025, continuing a pattern of sustained growth that began in 2022, with all three major cost components contributing to the...

California Workers’ Comp Costs Continued Upward Trend in 2025, WCRI Study Finds California Workers’ Comp Costs Continued Upward Trend in 2025, WCRI Study Finds
May 6, 2026

NY Court Affirms Dependent Adult Child Finding in COVID-19 Death Claim

The Appellate Division, Third Department, has affirmed a Workers’ Compensation Board finding that a deceased worker’s adult autistic son was dependent upon him at the time of his COVID-19 death,...

NY Court Affirms Dependent Adult Child Finding in COVID-19 Death Claim NY Court Affirms Dependent Adult Child Finding in COVID-19 Death Claim
May 5, 2026

Federal Court Holds PA’s Exclusivity Bars Tortious Interference Claim

Workers’ compensation exclusivity is often discussed in broad terms, but difficult questions sometimes arise at the margins—particularly when an employee alleges misconduct not in causing the original injury, but in...

Federal Court Holds PA’s Exclusivity Bars Tortious Interference Claim Federal Court Holds PA’s Exclusivity Bars Tortious Interference Claim
May 1, 2026

Substance Over Form: TN Court Looks Past Contract Label in Borrowed Employee Dispute

Lawyers are paid to draft agreements carefully. Contracts define relationships, allocate risk, and—at least in theory—clarify who stands in what legal posture to whom. But in workers’ compensation law, labels...

Substance Over Form: TN Court Looks Past Contract Label in Borrowed Employee Dispute Substance Over Form: TN Court Looks Past Contract Label in Borrowed Employee Dispute
Apr 30, 2026

Texas Court Rejects COVID-19 Death Claim

No Reliable Proof of Increased Occupational Risk As the first wave of COVID-19 workers’ compensation litigation begins to settle into the books, appellate courts are leaving behind decisions that will...

Texas Court Rejects COVID-19 Death Claim Texas Court Rejects COVID-19 Death Claim

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