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.
A Washington jury could appropriately determine that at the time of a worker's injury, he was so intoxicated that he had abandoned his employment, where evidence indicated the worker's blood alcohol level was substantially above the legal limit, held a state appellate court. Other evidence tended to show that the worker had consumed alcohol during his lunch break and had driven a vehicle erratically prior to his return to work after lunch. The court disregarded the worker's argument that the Workers' Compensation Act was to be liberally construed in his favor. Such a construction did not relieve the worker of proving his entitlement to benefits.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the 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 Gomez v. Department of Labor & Indus., 2020 Wash. App. LEXIS 1211 (Apr. 27, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 36.02.
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.