Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Quoting Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 3.03 and relying upon its earlier decision in Appeal of Margeson, 162 N.H. 273, 27 A.3d 663 (2011), the Supreme Court of New Hampshire reversed the state’s Compensation Appeals Board and held that a truck driver’s severe injuries sustained when he fell asleep while driving between a job site and his place of employment arose out of and in the course of the employment. The court indicated the case involved a mixed risk and the CAB erred in requiring the employee to prove work-induced weariness as a prerequisite to receiving compensation. The court indicated the situation was not unlike that of a fall due to an idiopathic condition, where an employee could recover if he or she could show that the employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury. Here there was no question that the injurious effects of falling asleep were increased by the environment in which the employee found himself at the time he fell asleep—behind the wheel of a moving truck.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Appeal of Kelly, 2015 N.H. LEXIS 24 (Mar. 20, 2015) [2015 N.H. LEXIS 24 (Mar. 20, 2015)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 3.03 [3.03]
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site