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.
Where a New York employer had no active workers’ compensation policy in effect on the date the claimant was determined to have been disabled due to an occupational disease—It appeared to have closed its doors—but such a policy did exist on the date the claimant retired, remand was necessary to determine if the insurer should be responsible for payment of benefits or, alternatively, if those benefits should be paid by the Uninsured Employers Fund.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law(LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Matter of Pisarski v. Accurate Plumbing & Heating Co., 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 601 (Feb. 4, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 102.04.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.