workers' comp 40 years later |
WILG Holds 40th Anniversary Symposium on the Status of Workers' Compensation in the United States, by Stephen Embry, Esq. Workers' compensation remains inadequate and inequitable 40 years after the 1972 National Commission on Workers' Compensation Laws reviewed the state of injured workers benefits. That is the conclusion reached by scholars and practioners in the field of workplace injury who recently gathered in Chicago to examine the history and prognosis for workers' compensation in a national symposium sponsored by the Workers' Injury Law and Advocacy Group. The symposium marked a recent confluence of events occurring 100 years ago which led to the adoption of the first wave of workers' safety laws and workers' compensation laws in the U.S. Read more.
|
Larson's on loss of consortium |
Spouse's Loss of Consortium Action Against Employer Barred by Exclusive Remedy Rule, by Thomas A. Robinson. The Supreme Court of California, reversing the state's Court of Appeals, recently held that the wife of an employee could not sue the employer for loss of consortium under Cal. Labor Code § 4558-the power press exception-which allows an employee to sue an employer when his or her injuries were "proximately caused by the employer's knowing removal of, or knowing failure to install" protective guards on a power-press machine, such as the swaging machine operated by the employee. Read more about othis case and other cases on settlement, tort immunity for co-employee, narcotics and return to work. |
boundaries of lhwca/dba |
The Boundaries of the LHWCA/DBA: Fisher, et al. v. Halliburton, et al., by Stephen M. Vaughan, Esq. Claimants and their attorneys have long tried to reach outside the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its progeny to find additional causes of action against employers and their insurance carriers Claimants and their attorneys have generally only succeeded where they can show intentional tort or injury. Such an effort has never been blessed by the Fifth Circuit where this case was reviewed. Fisher arises out of an effort to bring claims not covered by the Defense Base Act based on a somewhat novel approach to "injury" as defined by the Longshore Act. Read more.
|