Construing Virginia’s intentional violation of a known safety rule statute [Va. Code § 65.2-306(A)], a state appellate court affirmed an award of workers’ compensation benefits to an employee who sustained...
Virginia Claimant Did Not Violate Known Safety Rule in Connection with Injury Virginia Claimant Did Not Violate Known Safety Rule in Connection with InjuryIllustrating yet again the deference afforded a Judge of Compensation Claims when it comes to fact-finding, a Florida appellate court affirmed a JCC’s finding that an injured employee had not...
FL Court Affirms JCC's Finding of No Misrepresentation as to Claimant's "Outside" Income in Spite of Considerable Evidence to Contrary FL Court Affirms JCC's Finding of No Misrepresentation as to Claimant's "Outside" Income in Spite of Considerable Evidence to ContraryIn an opinion that provides perhaps the best discussion of the intentional injury exception to a state’s exclusive remedy rule, the Supreme Court of Texas held that in order for...
Texas High Court Shows "Substantially Certain" Rule Differs "Substantially" from State to State Texas High Court Shows "Substantially Certain" Rule Differs "Substantially" from State to StateA New York appellate court affirmed a decision by the state's Workers' Compensation Board that awarded benefits to a New York-based truck driver who sustained injuries in a roll-over accident...
NY Truck Driver's Reckless Driving Does Not Defeat Her Claim NY Truck Driver's Reckless Driving Does Not Defeat Her ClaimVa. Code § 65.2-306(A)(4) bars workers’ compensation claims for injuries that, inter alia, result from a claimant’s willful misconduct in refusing “to perform a duty required by statute.” In that...
Failure to Wear Seatbelt Proves Fatal to Virginia Driver’s Claim Failure to Wear Seatbelt Proves Fatal to Virginia Driver’s ClaimIn Painter v. Atwood, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176655 (D. Nev., Dec. 12, 2012), a federal district court from Nevada recently held, in relevant part, that a civil action filed...
US: Office Worker’s Tort Action Against Dentist Employer Alleging Sexual Assault Not Barred by Exclusivity US: Office Worker’s Tort Action Against Dentist Employer Alleging Sexual Assault Not Barred by Exclusivity