Browse By Tags

In a divided decision, the Supreme Court of Washington held that a staffing agency might, at least in some circumstances, be liable for the borrowing employer’s safety violations under the state’s Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) if...

Affirming a November 2020 decision by a lower appellate court, the Supreme Court of Ohio held the state Industrial Commission was within its powers when it rejected a proposed settlement agreement executed by representatives of an employer and an injured...

As is the case in a number of other states, Delaware’s Workers’ Compensation Act bars recovery of benefits if the employee’s injury results from “the employee’s deliberate and reckless indifference to danger” [19 Del...

Acknowledging that pursuant to Va. Code § 65.2306(A), an injured worker can be disqualified from receiving workers’ compensation benefits if he or she intentionally engages in activity contrary to a known safety rule imposed by the employer...

The Supreme Court of Kentucky held that a temporary staffing company could not be made to pay the 30 percent enhancement of workers’ compensation benefits due to the injured worker because of significant safety violations by the host (hiring) company...

Where an employee suffered an amputation of a finger when his Kevlar glove became entangled in one of the rotating machines at his employer’s facility, in spite of the fact that the employer had a safety rule, which the employee acknowledged he...

Ohio Admin.Code 4121-3-20(F)(1) requires that a staff hearing officer (SHO) review a proposed settlement agreement related to an alleged violation of specific safety requirements ("VSSR") claim for adequacy; a cursory review to determine if...

A broad release contained within a settlement of a violation of specific safety requirements ("VSSR") claim, signed by an injured employee represented by counsel at the time, barred a later civil action filed by the employee against the employer...

Applying what it said was the "economic realities test," a Washington appellate court found that a borrowing employer had exercised sufficient control over the borrowed employee that the employee staffing company supplying the worker should...

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed an award of death benefits to the surviving spouse of a municipal employee who died in a work-related trench collapse and criticized the state's Department of Labor for coming "perilously close to the...

Where an employee of a New Jersey company alleged that prior to his severe injury, the employer removed an important safety guard on a heavy machine, replacing it with a piece of tape so as to allow for continuous operation, and where the employee also...

An Ohio appellate court affirmed the imposition of a penalty for the violation of a specific safety requirement (VSSR) by a local fire department where the Commission found the district violated the maximum 24-inch step-to-ground-level on a district owned...

Applying the 4-part test described in Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law , § 34.01, et seq. , a Tennessee appellate court affirmed a state trial court’s determination that an employer failed to show that one of its healthcare workers...

An employer’s known work rule—that an employee should not lift more than 40 pounds without assistance—did not bar the claim of a Virginia worker who sustained a back injury while attempting to move three boxes of computers, each weighing...

Where a claimant was injured in a fall from a roof, the Industrial Commission did not err in awarding him additional compensation for his employer's violation of a specific safety requirement (“VSSR”), since Ohio Admin. Code 4123:1-3-09...