Newest Articles

Oct 7, 2026

Two Boxes Checked “No”

LA Second Circuit Affirms Forfeiture for False Answers on Pre-Hire Questionnaires About Prior Work Accidents and a Recommended Surgery Louisiana’s Second Circuit Court of Appeal has affirmed a ruling that...

Two Boxes Checked “No” Two Boxes Checked “No”
Oct 5, 2026

Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee

LA Fourth Circuit, 3–2, Holds Dump-Truck Driver Paid 25% of Truck Earnings Was an Employee Despite 1099; Dissent Invokes Manifest-Error Review The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit recently reversed...

Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee Louisiana Court: Paid a Percentage, Still an Employee
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

All Articles

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

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