Newest Articles

Jun 5, 2026

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician

Many disputes over physician choice in workers’ compensation arise when an injured worker seeks treatment from a doctor of his or her own choosing. Hayes v. Christian Retirement Homes, Inc.,...

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician
Jun 2, 2026

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity

Court Applies Massachusetts Law to Maine Injury, Rejects Immunity Defense in Multi-State Staffing Arrangement A New Hampshire contractor that likely would have enjoyed workers’ compensation immunity under Maine law lost...

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity
Jun 1, 2026

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions

New York’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed an Appellate Division order blocking defendants in a personal injury action from using a Workers’ Compensation Board causation determination as collateral estoppel, holding...

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions
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

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Jul 23, 2019

NY Makeup Artist Fails to Establish Bartonella bacteria Claim From Her Exposure to Rats

A New York appellate court affirmed a finding that claimant, a makeup artist, had failed to establish her claim related to an airborne illness (Bartonella bacteria) that she claimed she...

NY Makeup Artist Fails to Establish Bartonella bacteria Claim From Her Exposure to Rats NY Makeup Artist Fails to Establish Bartonella bacteria Claim From Her Exposure to Rats
Jul 19, 2019

Commentary: The Challenges in Dealing With Cautious Medical Testimony

Five Out of Seven Ohio Supreme Court Justices Say Medical Opinion Was Ambiguous In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed a finding by the Tenth District Court...

Commentary: The Challenges in Dealing With Cautious Medical Testimony Commentary: The Challenges in Dealing With Cautious Medical Testimony
Jul 18, 2019

Minnesota High Court Explains PTSD Evidentiary Requirements

Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subd. 15(d) (2018), which requires the employee to prove that the employee has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist...

Minnesota High Court Explains PTSD Evidentiary Requirements Minnesota High Court Explains PTSD Evidentiary Requirements
Jul 17, 2019

Kansas Hospital Worker Recovers for Two Unexplained Falls

Guided by the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Kansas in Estate of Graber v. Dillon Cos., 2019 Kan. LEXIS 67 (Apr. 12, 2019)[extended discussion of Graber can be...

Kansas Hospital Worker Recovers for Two Unexplained Falls Kansas Hospital Worker Recovers for Two Unexplained Falls
Jul 16, 2019

Texas Employer Not Liable for Gross Negligence After Heat-Related Death

A Texas appellate court recently affirmed a trial court’s summary judgment in favor of an employer in a gross negligence action filed against it by the family of a worker...

Texas Employer Not Liable for Gross Negligence After Heat-Related Death Texas Employer Not Liable for Gross Negligence After Heat-Related Death
Jul 15, 2019

Former NJ Employee’s Tort Suit Alleging Pharma Employer Forced Him to Use Non-FDA Approved Nasal Spray is Barred by Exclusivity Rule

A former pharmaceutical employee, who contended his employer and its CEO forced him to use a proposed (and non-FDA approved) nasal spray medication that the employer was trying to develop...

Former NJ Employee’s Tort Suit Alleging Pharma Employer Forced Him to Use Non-FDA Approved Nasal Spray is Barred by Exclusivity Rule Former NJ Employee’s Tort Suit Alleging Pharma Employer Forced Him to Use Non-FDA Approved Nasal Spray is Barred by Exclusivity Rule
Jul 12, 2019

PTSD Now a Compensable Condition in Connecticut—But Only if You’re a First Responder

This Wednesday (July 10, 2019), Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont, flanked by a group of first responders and state legislators, signed into law a new provision [S.B. 164, enrolled as Public...

PTSD Now a Compensable Condition in Connecticut—But Only if You’re a First Responder PTSD Now a Compensable Condition in Connecticut—But Only if You’re a First Responder
Jul 11, 2019

Virginia Claimant Awarded Benefits for Right Knee Condition More than 10 Years after Injury to Left Knee

Stressing that a workers’ compensation claimant may recover not only for injuries that directly result from an employment accident, but also for subsequent, consequential injuries that are causally connected to...

Virginia Claimant Awarded Benefits for Right Knee Condition More than 10 Years after Injury to Left Knee Virginia Claimant Awarded Benefits for Right Knee Condition More than 10 Years after Injury to Left Knee
Jul 10, 2019

Ohio Statute Prohibiting “Solicitation” in Workers’ Compensation Claims or Appeals Violates First Amendment

A provision in Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4123.88(A) that bars any person, either directly or indirectly, from soliciting authority to represent a claimant or employer in respect of a...

Ohio Statute Prohibiting “Solicitation” in Workers’ Compensation Claims or Appeals Violates First Amendment Ohio Statute Prohibiting “Solicitation” in Workers’ Compensation Claims or Appeals Violates First Amendment
Jul 9, 2019

Videotape Surveillance Dooms Former NY Firefighter’s Right to Continued Wage Replacement Benefits

A New York appellate court affirmed a finding by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that a former fireman violated N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 114-a when he represented in a...

Videotape Surveillance Dooms Former NY Firefighter’s Right to Continued Wage Replacement Benefits Videotape Surveillance Dooms Former NY Firefighter’s Right to Continued Wage Replacement Benefits
Jul 5, 2019

“Unlucky 13”: Failing to Answer Question on RB-89 Dooms NY Claimant’s Application for Board Review

A New York claimant’s Application for Review was defective where she failed to provide any information in the box for question 13 of the RB-89 form, held a New York...

“Unlucky 13”: Failing to Answer Question on RB-89 Dooms NY Claimant’s Application for Board Review “Unlucky 13”: Failing to Answer Question on RB-89 Dooms NY Claimant’s Application for Board Review
Jul 4, 2019

Minnesota: No-Fault Auto Insurer Must Pay Injured Worker’s “Additional” Chiropractic Charges

Where a Minnesota bus driver, who had been injured in a work-related motor vehicle accident, sought and received chiropractic care from one provider, but the workers’ compensation carrier refused to...

Minnesota: No-Fault Auto Insurer Must Pay Injured Worker’s “Additional” Chiropractic Charges Minnesota: No-Fault Auto Insurer Must Pay Injured Worker’s “Additional” Chiropractic Charges

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