Workers' Compensation Law Commons^™

Are Private Automobile Insurance Companies Replacing Workers’ Compensation Coverage When The Employee/Insured Is Injured In The Course And Scope Of Employment By A Third-Party Tortfeasor?: Rubin V. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Micah Echols

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “Multiple sources for recovery are available for an employee who is physically injured by a third-party tortfeasor in the course and scope of employment. This is especially true when the physical injury triggers coverage under a health insurance policy or other type of insurance policy for medical benefits. First, assuming that the employer participates in workers’ compensation insurance, the employee is entitled to receive workers’ compensation benefits for medical expenses. Second, the employee can also recover payments for medical benefits from the third-party tortfeasor in a common-law negligence lawsuit. Third, the employee, who in this context would be considered …

Brief Of Respondents, Norfolk & Western Railway Co. V. Ayers, No. 01-963 (U.S. Aug. 19, 2002), Richard J. Lazarus

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Of American Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. V. Ayers, No. 01-963 (U.S. Aug. 19, 2002), ., Paul F. Rothstein

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of Brown V. National Football League, Darryll M. Halcomb Lewis

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

Employer Liability For Supervisors' Intentional Torts: The Uncertain Scope Of The "Alter Ego" Exception, Michael Hayes, Quinn Broverman

All Faculty Scholarship

When Illinois employees are the victims of intentional torts by supervisors, can they bring common law tort suits against their employers for these injuries, or are they limited to bringing a claim under the workers' compensation system? This question, which arises with unfortunate reguIarity, lacks a clear answer because both state and federal courts in Illinois are divided over the scope of the "alter ego" exception to the exclusivity of workers' compensation as the remedy for intentionally inflicted workplace injuries.

The Illinois Workers' Compensation Act ("IWCA") contains exclusivity provisions that mandate that workers' compensation is the sole remedy available to …

Revisiting The Intersection Of Workers' Compensation And Product Liability: An Assessment Of A Proposed Federal Solution To An Old Problem, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

This article addresses a less publicized, but potentially far reaching provision of the Product Liability Legal Reform Act of 1996: the provision pertaining to the intersection of product liability and workers' compensation. The prototypical case is one in which an employee is injured on the job and the injury is caused, at least in part, by a defective product. In many instances, the employer may also be at fault. This scenario potentially calls into play both the product liability and the workers' compensation systems, raising certain relevant questions. Can the employee secure compensation benefits from the employer and tort damages …

Ohio's Employment Intentional Tort: A Workers' Compensation Exception, Or The Creation Of An Entirely New Cause Of Action, Marc A. Claybon

Cleveland State Law Review

This note will begin with a review of the history of workers' compensation in Ohio, including the development of the exclusive remedy provision. Next, this note will discuss the types of injuries normally compensated by the Ohio Workers' Compensation Act, followed by an analysis of the Ohio Supreme Court cases and legislation creating an intentional tort exception in Ohio. Finally, this note will critique newly enacted Revised Code section 2745.01, discuss the severe problems associated with an expansive interpretation of the statute, and suggest that continuing legislative reform is needed in this area of law.

Employer Liability Under The Third Party Provision Of The Washington Industrial Insurance Act: The Dual Capacity And Dual Persona Doctrines In Evans V. Thompson, Melissa M. Jackson

Seattle University Law Review

Most workers' compensation schemes are designed to provide a swift and sure source of benefits to injured workers by placing on employers the risks and burdens of modern industry. In keeping with this policy, Washington's Industrial Insurance Act2 (IIA) requires injured workers to relinquish the right to sue at common law for damages sustained on the job, and it requires employers to accept liability for a measure of damages set out by the statute. However, if a worker's injuries are caused by the negligence of a third person who is not in the worker's same employ, the IIA's third-party provision …

The Substantial Certainty Exception To Workers' Compensation, Michael Doran

Campbell Law Review

This Article attempts to point toward the correct definition and application of the substantial certainty liability standard, recognizing its foundation in the Woodson and Barrino decisions. This Article also will point out the apparent misapplications of the standard in decisions handed down after Woodson. Finally, in light of the North Carolina Supreme Court's per curiam decision in Owens v. W.K Deal Printing, Inc., which appears to illustrate the court's disapproval of the definition and application of substantial certainty contained in decisions from other courts, this Article will attempt to forecast the direction of future decisions involving this theory of civil …

A Sheep In Wolf's Clothing: Territorialism In The Guise Of Interest Analysis In Cooney V. Osgood Machinery, Inc, Aaron Twerski

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Interpretation Of The Statutory Modification Of Joint And Several Liability: Resisting The Deconstruction Of Tort Reform, Gregory C. Sisk

Seattle University Law Review

This Article defends RCW 4.22.070 and opposes the deconstruction of legislative tort reform. The Article’s premise is that the legislature did indeed intend to accomplish a significant reform of the liability system and to take a long, purposeful stride toward the implementation of comparative fault as applied to all parties in tort litigation. The Article concludes that the legislature adopted language that adequately, if sometimes imperfectly, achieves that purpose. The Article discusses the following: the meaning of “fault” as applicable through RCW 4.22.070; the nature of the entities to whom fault must be allocated; the responsibility for raising the culpability …

A New Exception To The Exclusivity Provision Of The North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act - Woodson V. Rowland, Debbie Collins

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dual Capacity Liability And Co-Employee Company Physicians: Undermining The Integrity Of The Workers' Compensation System, Kim R. Kleppel

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Employer Intentional Torts In Virginia: Proposal For An Exception To The Exclusive Workers' Compensation Remedy, Jodi Parrish Power

University of Richmond Law Review

Workers' compensation is a no-fault system of recovery implemented by statute in every state. Originating in the nature of a compromise, the workers' compensation system is the exclusive remedy between the employee and employer. The majority of states, however, recognize an exception to this exclusivity provision where an employer's actions constitute an intentional tort. Virginia has yet to recognize such an exception by statute or judicial action.

Once Is Enough: A Proposed Bar Of The Injured Employee's Cause Of Action Against A Third Party, Philip D. Oliver

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Moderate And Restrained Federal Product Liability Bill: Targeting The Crisis Areas For Resolution, Aaron D. Twerski

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this article I have tried to offer a rational, feasible, and politically acceptable solution to the present product liability crisis. To do this, I have first set out the problem. I explain in Part I how courts have created the crisis by formulating incomprehensible legal standards. In Part II, I examine the difficulties with assessing punitive damages against a defendant. In Part III, I discuss the conflict between the torts and workers' compensation systems. In Part IV, I reflect on the need to protect wholesalers and retailers from needless litigation. Part V suggests that a federal study on the …

Midgett V. Sackett-Chicago, Inc.: The Short-Sighted Use Of State Remedies To Protect Union Employees From Retaliatory Discharge, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 565 (1985), Benjamin P. Hyink, Lawrence M. Liebman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Charting The Future Course For Corporate Management Of Health Risks, Michael S. Baram

Faculty Scholarship

Corporations engage in technological activities of benefit to society, but thereby also create new health risks for workers, consumers, and communities. Government regulatory agencies deal with this chronic problem by conducting risk analyses and imposing various duties on private firms. Despite agency efforts and corporate compliance, health risks continue to arise and take their toll. To what extent will private firms voluntarily assume greater responsibility for preventing these health risks? This question is of increasing social importance, because the limitations of regulatory efforts are now obvious, whereas health risks are now being identified at what appears to be an increasing …

An Analysis Of The Legal, Social, And Political Issues Raised By Asbestos Litigation, John P. Burns, G. Edward Cassady, Iii, Kenneth B. Cole, Jr., Timothy R. Dodson, Philip E. Holladay, Jr., Paul C. Ney, Jr., Drew T. Parobek, Kimberly Payne, D. Blaine Sanders, L. D. Simmons, Ii, Charles D. Maguire, Jr. Special Project Editor, Laurin Blumenthal Associate Special Project Editor

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Special Project examines the most important issues of the asbestos problem and advocates a congressional solution (1) to relieve the courts of the thousands of present and potential asbestos cases, (2) to protect future claimants' rights to adequate compensation, and (3) to provide for equitable participation by all responsible parties, which, in addition to asbestos manufacturers,include the federal government, insurance companies, and the tobacco industry. The first six parts of the Special Project examine the various issues of asbestos litigation: theories of liability in products liability suits against asbestos manufacturers, causation,defenses, statutory limitations on actions, collateral estoppel, and punitive …

Sydenstricker V. Unipunch Products, Inc.: Contribution And Indemnity Under Mandolidis Theory, Richard M. Yurko Jr.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Glass V. Stahl Specialty Company: Reconciling Third Party's Contribution Rights With Employer's Immunity Under Workers' Compensation, Karin Nyrop

Seattle University Law Review

This note argues that the correct resolution of the tension between the employer’s immunity and the third party’s right of contribution requires balancing the interests of all parties. The employer has an interest in retaining the workers’ compensation law’s exclusive no-fault recovery system; the third party tortfeasor seeks to avoid shouldering the entire liability of another at-fault tortfeasor capable of contribution. At the same time, the employee has a right to full and speedy compensation, and the state has an interest in maintaining the financial stability of its accident fund. This note explores the policies and legal arguments supporting the …

The Need For Workers' Compensation Reform In Ohio's Definition Of Injury: Szymanski V. Halle's Department Store, Ellen L. Knight

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note begins with a background of Ohio Supreme Court limitations on the General Assembly's definition of injury in workers' compensation law. Part IV(C) of this Note will analyze other jurisdiction's approaches to the compensability of physical injury caused by mental stimulus and will discuss other aspects and refinements of personal injury in the course of employment. It is proposed that there is a need for reform in Ohio's construction of "any injury"'-one that will embrace the nationwide trends of "uniformly" compensating workers for both physical and mental injury caused by mental stimulus. Ohio currently excludes both types of injuries. …

Miller V. Northside Danzi Construction Company: Immunity, The Contractor-Under Clause And Alaska's Workers' Compensation Act, Timothy R. Gosselin

Seattle University Law Review

In Miller v. Northside Danzi Construction Co., "the Alaska Supreme Court held that a general contractor," required by Alaska's Workers' Compensation Act to pay compensation to an uninsured subcontractor's injured employee, is not immune from liability at common law for the same injuries. Interpreting narrowly the Act's "employer" definition, the court prohibited the general contractor from asserting the exclusive liability defense granted to the primary employer who pays compensation to its injured employee, and thus permitted the injured worker to claim awards under the Act and independently at common law. By allowing the injured employee recovery from the contractor …

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1980

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1979

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1978

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Kelsay V. Motorola, Inc. : Tort Action For Retaliatory Discharge Upon Filing Workmen's Compensation Claims, 12 J. Marshall J. Prac. & Proc. 659 (1979), Elena Z. Kezelis

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Develpoments In West Virginia Law: 1977, Joseph W. Bowman, Thomas Evans, Janet Archer Goodwin, Laura Jane Kelly, Kenneth E. Tawney

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1976

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1975-1976, Lloyd George Jackson Ii, John Burdick Koch, Alan Dale Moats, Thomas A. Vorbach

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.