What Do You Think? One way employees can get around the exclusive remedy provision and sue an employer in tort for money damages is by showing the employer purposely injured them. But is it enough […]

What Do You Think? An injured employee in Illinois may be entitled to workers’ compensation benefits as long as she was not acting intentionally or recklessly. But what if she were injured while driving from […]

What Do You Think? Does violating a safety rule at work mean the resulting injury isn’t compensable? Sometimes. A case involving a maintenance man for a milk manufacturing company whose finger was partially amputated addresses […]

Case File When a carpenter suffered a fatal pulmonary embolism and collapsed into shallow water at a jobsite, the key question on appeal was whether the employment created a compensable risk. Simply Research subscribers have […]

Case File Because the term "toll" meant to "suspend, stop temporarily, or abate the limitations period," rather than extend a discrete one-year period to file additional claims, a Florida teacher's receipt of benefits stopped the […]

What Do You Think? In Alaska, the “remote site doctrine” may expand the reach of the workers’ compensation act even to an employee’s residence–if that residence is supplied by the employer. A case involving a […]

What Do You Think? Employees injured at work normally cannot sue a company for negligence and obtain money damages. The “exclusive remedy rule” limits them to workers’ compensation benefits. But there is an exception if […]

Case File For an Ohio school worker who had a filing cabinet fall on her, it was unclear whether she was "not working" because she was taking the summer off or because of injury. Simply […]