What Do You Think? An employer may face significant liability if a worker can show the employer intentionally injured him. That’s because intentional injuries are generally not considered workplace accidents whose sole remedy is workers’ […]

The “exclusive remedy” rule is not the only thing that can stop an employee from suing a company for negligence when the company has workers’ compensation coverage. An Ohio case involving an employee who said […]

What Do You Think? Employees generally can’t sue employers for monetary damages in court. Workers’ compensation is the exclusive remedy, in most cases, and tends to zap those cases right out of court. But consider […]

Case File The Maryland Supreme Court held that the plain language of the exclusive remedy provision of the state's Workers' Compensation Act was unambiguous in that a compliant employer's liability for a covered employee's work-related […]

What Do You Think? Injured North Carolina workers and their estates can sue their employer for negligence if they can meet the requirements of the Woodson exception to the exclusivity rule. A case involving a […]

Case File When it comes to latent disease cases, the Washington Supreme Court did away with a decade-old precedent case to hold that an employer's virtual certainty that disease will occur satisfies the "actual knowledge" […]

Case File A worker lost his life due to an accident while working on the New Jersey turnpike, but the court didn't find enough to show that the employer committed "willful" violations for purposes of […]

Courts & Compliance Like quite a few states across the country, New Jersey's Workers' Compensation Act contains an exclusive remedy provision under which employees relinquish their right to pursue common-law remedies -- in other words, […]