LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
California: Stuntman Held to Be Special Employee – Exclusive Remedy Bars Civil Action, Ogilvie Oral Argument Set

The Second District Court of Appeal has upheld the dismissal of a civil action stemming from a claim for personal injuries sustained by a stunt man while performing a risky stunt while rehearsing for a film. In Angelotti v The Disney Company et al , the Court held the stunt man was an special employee...

Five Recent Cases You Should Know About (5/27/2011)

Larson's Spotlight on Contractor Liability, Removal from Labor Force, Negligent and Reckless Hiring, Average Weekly Wage, and Compensable Claim. Larson's surveys the latest case developments that you need to know about. Thomas A. Robinson, the staff writer for Larson's Workers' Compensation...

Larson’s Spotlight on Recent Cases: Injured HVAC Worker Established “Odd Lot” Status

Larson's Spotlight on Odd Lot, Causation, Farm Laborer, Immunity From Exclusive Remedy . Larson's surveys the latest case developments that you need to know about. Thomas A. Robinson, the staff writer for Larson's Workers' Compensation Law , has compiled the list below. WY: State...

Florida: 3rd DCA Strikes Down “Padgett” Decision on Mootness and Standing Grounds

The Third District Court of Appeal has reversed the much-talked-about “Padgett” decision by Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County Judge Jorge Cueto, which last August declared unconstitutional the exclusive remedy provision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Law—§ 440...

Georgia: “Fault” of Employer Can Be Considered in Plaintiff Employee’s Tort Action Against Third Party

Georgia’s apportionment statute, OCGA § 51-12-33(c) requires the trier of fact to consider the “fault” of all persons or entities that have contributed to the plaintiff’s alleged injury or damages, including nonparties. The fault of the nonparty must be considered even when...

Washington: Co-employee Immunity Applies Only When Defendant Acting in the Course of Employment

An appellate court in Washington state held that it was error for a trial court to grant summary judgment in favor of a defendant, on exclusive remedy grounds, where the plaintiff alleged he was struck by a vehicle driven by the defendant, a fellow employee, as the plaintiff walked across an access road...

Connecticut: Contractor With Contractor Controlled Insurance Program Enjoyed Immunity

A general contractor that implemented a contractor controlled insurance program (CCIP) to centralize the purchasing of workers’ compensation insurance for a major project has “paid compensation benefits” to the employees of its subcontractors, entitling it to “principal employer”...

Alaska: Former Employer May Proceed Against Physician and Employer’s Attorney Involved in Attempt to Terminate Workers’ Compensation Benefits

In a split decision, the Supreme Court of Alaska held that where a plaintiff (a former employee) and his spouse sued the former employer, its workers’ compensation insurer, a private investigator, the employer’s attorney, and a doctor who performed an employer’s medical evaluation ...

Washington: Employee Can Sue Co-Employee in Tort for Injuries Sustained in After-Hours Accident

Adopting the dominant rule discussed in Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law , Ch. 111, § 111.03, the Supreme Court of Washington held that a co-employee enjoys immunity under the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s workers’ compensation law only when that co-employee...

North Carolina: Workers’ Involved in “Ultra-hazardous” Activity May Not Sue Employers in Tort

A North Carolina appellate court held that the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act apply to bar civil actions against the employer for all employees—even those that are engaged in “ultra-hazardous” activity. Acknowledging that at common law...