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
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
Feb 7, 2020

NY Court Affirms Board’s Reduction of Attorney Fee to 45 Percent of Amount Requested

Yesterday, a New York appellate court affirmed a decision by a panel of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that set counsel fees for the claimant’s attorney at $8,000, instead of...

NY Court Affirms Board’s Reduction of Attorney Fee to 45 Percent of Amount Requested NY Court Affirms Board’s Reduction of Attorney Fee to 45 Percent of Amount Requested
Feb 6, 2020

No Apportionment For NY Claimant’s Preexisting Cancer In Spite of Medical Evidence

In spite of medical evidence that indicated an injured employee’s disability should be equally apportioned between his noncompensable lung cancer condition and a subsequent work-related injury to his right shoulder...

No Apportionment For NY Claimant’s Preexisting Cancer In Spite of Medical Evidence No Apportionment For NY Claimant’s Preexisting Cancer In Spite of Medical Evidence
Feb 5, 2020

Maryland Employer’s Subrogation Interest Does Not Extend to Employee’s Medical Malpractice Settlement

Where an employer paid for medical services exclusively to treat the compensable injury, but not to treat any additional harm from medical negligence, the employer had no subrogation interest in...

Maryland Employer’s Subrogation Interest Does Not Extend to Employee’s Medical Malpractice Settlement Maryland Employer’s Subrogation Interest Does Not Extend to Employee’s Medical Malpractice Settlement
Feb 4, 2020

NH Supreme Court Panel Reverses Board’s Denial in Unexplained Fall Case

A panel of the New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed a finding of the state’s Compensation Appeals Board (CAB) denying a claim by an elementary school speech assistant who sustained a...

NH Supreme Court Panel Reverses Board’s Denial in Unexplained Fall Case NH Supreme Court Panel Reverses Board’s Denial in Unexplained Fall Case
Feb 3, 2020

Super Bowl Monday Special: PA Court Says NFL Player Was Not “Seasonal” Employee

With a tip of the hat to those of you who reported to the office today — according to a recent research article by Joyce Maroney, Executive Director of the...

Super Bowl Monday Special: PA Court Says NFL Player Was Not “Seasonal” Employee Super Bowl Monday Special: PA Court Says NFL Player Was Not “Seasonal” Employee
Jan 31, 2020

Washington Claimant May Not Recover for PTSD as an Occupational Disease

A Washington appellate court affirmed a finding by the state’s Department of Labor and Industries (”the Department”) that an employee could not prevail in her occupational disease claim for post-traumatic...

Washington Claimant May Not Recover for PTSD as an Occupational Disease Washington Claimant May Not Recover for PTSD as an Occupational Disease
Jan 30, 2020

No Apportionment of Fault Allowed against Arkansas Employer

Yesterday, an Arkansas appellate court affirmed a finding by a county circuit court that held the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, as amended and codified at Ark. Code Ann. §§...

No Apportionment of Fault Allowed against Arkansas Employer No Apportionment of Fault Allowed against Arkansas Employer
Jan 29, 2020

General Liability Insurer Must Defend In Spite of Fact That Injury Occurred at Workplace

In True North Me. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13941 (Jan. 28, 2020), a federal district court sitting in Maine applied the so-called “comparison test” —...

General Liability Insurer Must Defend In Spite of Fact That Injury Occurred at Workplace General Liability Insurer Must Defend In Spite of Fact That Injury Occurred at Workplace

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