Browse By Tags

The “going and coming” rule, which generally holds that a worker’s commute to and from home is outside the scope of the employment if he or she has a fixed locus of employment and fixed hours, could also be utilized in a negligence action...

The failure, on the part of an injured employee, to abide by lifting restrictions could not alone be sufficient to constitute an independent intervening cause that would relieve his or her employer (or carrier) from the responsibility for continued workers’...

Answering a restated certified question from the U.S. District Court (Eastern District of Virginia), the Supreme Court of Virginia, in a deeply divided 4-3 decision, held that an employer owed a duty of care to an employee's family member who alleged...

Oscar Willhelm Nilsson, a San Francisco motorcyclist, asserted that he was involved in a collision on Dec. 7, 2017 with a self-driving 2016 Chevrolet Bolt that was in self-driving mode. Nilsson claimed that after the Bolt switched lanes on the driver’s...

Construing Oklahoma law, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a federal district court’s dismissal of a negligence action filed against the sole stockholder of a worker’s employer, finding the district court failed to consider the stockholder's...

Guidry v. U.S. Department of the Interior , 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24787 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2014), [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ]. In Guidry , the district court held that, in an action where an underlying co-defendant (the...

Under California’s “required vehicle” exception to the going and coming rule, injuries sustained during the commute are said to arise out of and in the course of the employment if the employer required the employee to utilize her personal...

A New York court has found, in relevant part, that the exclusive remedy defense may not be maintained by a former employer in a civil action filed against it by plaintiffs, all former lifeguards at the defendant's parks, alleging that defendant surreptitiously...

Where a parent corporation paid workers’ compensation benefits for employees of a subsidiary, it enjoyed immunity from negligence claims under 820 ILCS 305/5(a) (2012) only if it was under a legal obligation to pay the benefits, held an Illinois...

Citing Garcia v. Pittsylvania County Service Authority , 845 F.2d 465 (4th Cir. 1988), the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a federal district court’s dismissal, on exclusive remedy grounds, of a negligence action filed by a North Carolina...

Changes to section 287.120.1 lowered the burden of proof to sue a co-worker based on common law, according to the court of appeals, when it reversed a dismissal for failure to state a claim. Leeper v Asmus WD 76772 (May 27, 2014), 2014 MO App Lexis 605...

Here’s the fourth batch of advanced postings for the April 2014 issue of Cal. Comp. Cases. Lexis.com and Lexis Advance subscribers can link to the case to read the complete headnotes and summaries . © Copyright 2014 LexisNexis. All rights...

Noting that a federal court sitting in diversity must apply the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits—here that of Mississippi—a federal district court held that an injured employee of a subcontractor could not sue the general...

In a personal injury case involving a workers’ compensation nonsubscriber, a Texas appellate court affirmed, for the most part, a judgment favoring an employee who sustained injuries when he was struck by a bundle of large-gauge wire used to make...

While a business entity’s injured employees might state a claim against third parties for their physical injuries allegedly caused by those third parties’ negligence, the business entity itself, which has suffered neither a physical injury...