Newest Articles

Mar 10, 2026

Second Circuit Bars Medical Marijuana Reimbursement Under the Longshore Act

In Garcia v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 6549 (2d Cir. Mar. 5, 2026), the Second Circuit denied a petition for review filed by a...

Second Circuit Bars Medical Marijuana Reimbursement Under the Longshore Act Second Circuit Bars Medical Marijuana Reimbursement Under the Longshore Act
Mar 6, 2026

New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits

Every dollar spent on workers’ compensation falls into one of two broad categories: benefits paid to injured workers—medical care and wage replacement—and the costs of delivering those benefits. The second...

New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits New York’s Hidden Cost Problem: WCRI Examines the Price of Delivering Benefits
Mar 5, 2026

Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage

In Motors v. Bayly (Red House Motors d/b/a Bayly’s Garage), 2026 Del. LEXIS 92 (Mar. 2, 2026), the Delaware Supreme Court reversed a Superior Court decision that the high court...

Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage Delaware Supreme Court Reinstates IAB’s Denial of Sole Proprietor Coverage
Mar 3, 2026

Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision

In Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Department of Financial Services, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 1469 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 25, 2026), the First District Court of Appeal recently held that...

Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision Florida Court Invalidates Rules Expanding “Absolute Choice” Pharmacy Provision

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Feb 27, 2020

Michigan Auditor’s Auto Accident Injury Claim Not Barred by Going and Coming Rule

Stressing that the Michigan Supreme Court’s Stark decision had not set forth four “factors” to be weighed in determining whether a claimant’s going and coming injury nevertheless occurred in the...

Michigan Auditor’s Auto Accident Injury Claim Not Barred by Going and Coming Rule Michigan Auditor’s Auto Accident Injury Claim Not Barred by Going and Coming Rule
Feb 26, 2020

NY Hospital Employee’s Tort Action Against Outside Management Services Company Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine

Where a hospital entered into a contract with a management services company (“the management company”), pursuant to which the management company trained and sometimes supervised the hospital’s “housekeepers,” but where...

NY Hospital Employee’s Tort Action Against Outside Management Services Company Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine NY Hospital Employee’s Tort Action Against Outside Management Services Company Barred by Exclusive Remedy Doctrine
Feb 24, 2020

Missouri Claimants Not Entitled to Statutory “Enhanced Benefit” for Worker’s Mesothelioma

In Missouri, where employers have elected to accept mesothelioma liability pursuant to a special provision of the state Act — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 287.200.4(3)(a)(2013) — the employer becomes liable...

Missouri Claimants Not Entitled to Statutory “Enhanced Benefit” for Worker’s Mesothelioma Missouri Claimants Not Entitled to Statutory “Enhanced Benefit” for Worker’s Mesothelioma
Feb 21, 2020

Arkansas Worker Fails to Rebut Presumption After Positive Drug Test

An Arkansas appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that held an injured worker had failed to rebut the presumption that his work-related injury was “substantially...

Arkansas Worker Fails to Rebut Presumption After Positive Drug Test Arkansas Worker Fails to Rebut Presumption After Positive Drug Test
Feb 20, 2020

Georgia Employee Not Entitled to Change in Physician Since Injury Was Resolved

Where the Georgia Board found that the employee’s work-related injuries had resolved prior to the date the employee requested a change in her treating physician, it was appropriate for the...

Georgia Employee Not Entitled to Change in Physician Since Injury Was Resolved Georgia Employee Not Entitled to Change in Physician Since Injury Was Resolved
Feb 19, 2020

Unusual “Event” Versus Unusual “Stress”: AZ Court Says Commission Should Reconsider Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim

Construing Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-1043.01(B), which denies coverage for mental injuries, such as PTSD, unless some “unexpected, unusual or extraordinary stress related to the employment … was a substantial...

Unusual “Event” Versus Unusual “Stress”: AZ Court Says Commission Should Reconsider Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim Unusual “Event” Versus Unusual “Stress”: AZ Court Says Commission Should Reconsider Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim
Feb 18, 2020

Around the Horn: Admissibility of Hearsay in Workers’ Compensation Cases

It is axiomatic that the procedural law of workers’ compensation takes its lead and tone from the beneficent nature of the legislation. Except in those few jurisdictions utilizing court administration...

Around the Horn: Admissibility of Hearsay in Workers’ Compensation Cases Around the Horn: Admissibility of Hearsay in Workers’ Compensation Cases
Feb 17, 2020

Utah Worker Found to Have Sustained PTD In Spite of His Return to Work

Acknowledging that in most cases in Utah, an injured worker who is capable of returning to work full-time cannot be considered to have sustained permanent total disability, a state appellate...

Utah Worker Found to Have Sustained PTD In Spite of His Return to Work Utah Worker Found to Have Sustained PTD In Spite of His Return to Work
Feb 14, 2020

Ohio Fire Department Hit With Safety Penalty

In a case construing Ohio’s unique law and rules regarding the violation of a specific safety requirement, a state appellate court refused to overturn a decision by the state’s Industrial...

Ohio Fire Department Hit With Safety Penalty Ohio Fire Department Hit With Safety Penalty
Feb 13, 2020

Florida’s 30-Day Grace Period to Avoid Attorney’s Fees is Not Extended for Holidays and Weekends

Florida’s Rule 60Q-6.109 of the state’s Rules of Procedure for Workers’ Compensation Adjudications provides that if an act required or allowed to be done falls on a holiday or weekend...

Florida’s 30-Day Grace Period to Avoid Attorney’s Fees is Not Extended for Holidays and Weekends Florida’s 30-Day Grace Period to Avoid Attorney’s Fees is Not Extended for Holidays and Weekends
Feb 12, 2020

New York SLU Awards Made for “Members”, not for Body Parts Making up Those Members

Under N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 15(3), schedule loss of use (SLU) awards may be awarded only for a statutorily-enumerated member — for example, a leg or an arm —...

New York SLU Awards Made for “Members”, not for Body Parts Making up Those Members New York SLU Awards Made for “Members”, not for Body Parts Making up Those Members
Feb 11, 2020

Illinois Act Provides No Penalties for Delay in Authorizing Medical Treatment

An Illinois appellate court affirmed an order of a county circuit court that, in turn, confirmed a decision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission reversing an award of attorney fees...

Illinois Act Provides No Penalties for Delay in Authorizing Medical Treatment Illinois Act Provides No Penalties for Delay in Authorizing Medical Treatment

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