Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Ohio Workers' Compensation Act (2)
- Workers compensation (2)
- Workers' compensation (2)
- Accrued compensation (1)
- Amateur athletics (1)
-
- BLBA (1)
- Benefits (1)
- Benefits review board (1)
- Black Lung Benefits Act (1)
- Black lung disease (1)
- Brb (1)
- Circuit split (1)
- Coal (1)
- Coal miners (1)
- Coal mining (1)
- Death benefits (1)
- Dependent (1)
- Dock (1)
- Dual capacity doctrine (1)
- Going and coming rule (1)
- Harbor worker (1)
- Injured college athlete (1)
- Intentional tort (1)
- Jensen (1)
- LHWCA (1)
- Labor laws (1)
- Longshore (1)
- Longshore and harbor workers' compensation act (1)
- Longshoremen (1)
- Manufacturer liability (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Labor and Employment Law
Finding A Way Out Of No Man's Land: Compensating Mental-Mental Claims And Bringing West Virginia's Workers' Compensation System Into The 21st Century, Logan Burke
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Manufacturer's Liability As A Dual Capacity Of An Employer, John D. Lambert
Manufacturer's Liability As A Dual Capacity Of An Employer, John D. Lambert
Akron Law Review
In recent years, a new theory of recovery for employees' injuries arising out of an employment situation has emerged where the employer's product is the proximate cause of the injury. In most situations the theory of recovery for the employee would be workmen's compensation statutes with their schedules which limit the amount the employee recovers. Recently, to avoid this inadequate measure of damages, employees' attorneys have, with increasing regularity, alleged that the injury arose out of a second or dual capacity of the employer, unrelated to and independent of the normal employer-employee obligations and duties.
Gradually Developed Disabilities: A Dilemma For Workers' Compensation, M. Thomas Arnold
Gradually Developed Disabilities: A Dilemma For Workers' Compensation, M. Thomas Arnold
Akron Law Review
This article will examine some of these problems and attempt to make a few modest suggestions as to the direction future consideration of the compensability of gradually developed disabilities should take.
Exception To The Going And Coming Rule: Special Hazard Or Risk, Karen M. Holmes
Exception To The Going And Coming Rule: Special Hazard Or Risk, Karen M. Holmes
Akron Law Review
In Littlefield v. Pillsbury Co., the Ohio Supreme Court specifically adopted the "special hazard or risk" exception to the "going and coming" rule. This exception extends workers' compensation coverage to claims for injuries sustained in accidents occurring outside an employer's premises, before or after work, if the injury occurs because of a hazard created by the employment.
Eligibility To Receive Death Benefits Plus Accrued Compensation; State Ex Rel. Nyitray V. Industrial Commission, Mary Clare O'Connor
Eligibility To Receive Death Benefits Plus Accrued Compensation; State Ex Rel. Nyitray V. Industrial Commission, Mary Clare O'Connor
Akron Law Review
In State ex re. Nyitray v. Industrial Commission, the Ohio Supreme Court recently overruled State ex rel. Spiker v. Industrial Commission, a forty year-old case which had interpreted two important sections of the Ohio Workers' Compensation Act. Under the new ruling, dependents of workers who die from work-related injuries or occupational diseases will be eligible to receive death benefits as well as compensation which had accrued to the worker up until the time of his death.
The New Workers' Compensatin Law In Ohio: Senate Bill 307 Was No Accident, Scott Washam
The New Workers' Compensatin Law In Ohio: Senate Bill 307 Was No Accident, Scott Washam
Akron Law Review
In Part I, this comment traces the evolution of workers' compensation laws in this country with particular emphasis on the development of the Act in Ohio. In Part II, the relevant caselaw is discussed, including Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Jones v. VIP Development Company, and their progeny which led to the enactment of Senate Bill 307. In Part III, Bill 30710 is considered along with its implications for the injured worker.
College Athletes Should Be Entitled To Workers' Compensation For Sports-Related Injuries: A Request To Broaden The Definition Of Employee Under Ohio Revised Code Section 4123.01, David W. Woodburn
Akron Law Review
This Comment examines the Ohio Workers' Compensation Act 25 and its applicability to scholarship-athletes. Part I discusses the failure of the NCAA and its universities to adopt an insurance program capable of providing effective coverage to scholarship-athletes. Part II provides a general overview of workers' compensation and discusses the major cases which either support or negate the applicability of workers' compensation to scholarship-athletes. Part III examines Ohio Revised Code section 4123.01 and how it can be interpreted to include scholarship-athletes within its scope, as well as discussing the public policy implications of incorporating scholarship students with this section.
Blue Skies For Black Lung Benefits Act Survivors? Courts' Interpretations Of § 932(L) Following The Enactment Of The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act, Maureen Hughes
Catholic University Law Review
This Note summarizes the amendments made to the Black Lung Benefits Act (BLBA) following its passage in 1969 through the enactment of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The Note also addresses the split among the circuits over the meaning of the revised language in 30 U.S.C. § 932(l) (2012), and explains the reasoning of the Third, Fourth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits regarding the effect of the PPACA on BLBA benefit eligibility for miners’ dependent survivors. Further, this Note explains the significance of, and necessity in, resolving the confusion over § 932(l), and …
Land Ho! Two Words An Injured Longshore Or Harbor Worker Never Wants To Hear, Adam Hare
Land Ho! Two Words An Injured Longshore Or Harbor Worker Never Wants To Hear, Adam Hare
Catholic University Law Review
In 1927, the United States Congress passed the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) to provide workers’ compensation coverage to maritime workers injured outside the purview of state workers’ compensation laws. Rigid judicial interpretation of the original Act, however, led to inequitable outcomes in the maritime industry. Workers neither on land nor on the water when injured could not claim workers’ compensation benefits under state or federal laws. The 1972 amendments to the LHWCA sought to cure this inequity. The amended Act included a situs requirement. This Comment analyzes the most important judicial interpretations of the situs requirement of …