By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Practitioners beware! Death benefit trials often raise intricate and unique evidentiary conundrums. Obtaining...
Oakland, CA – California’s State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) rose nearly 3.8 percent in the year ending March 31, 2024, which will result in an increase in California workers’ compensation...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 10 October 2024 A Report of En Banc and Significant Panel Decisions of the WCAB and Selected Court Opinions of Related Interest, With a Digest of WCAB Decisions...
By Hon. Robert G. Rassp, Presiding Judge, WCAB Los Angeles, California Division of Workers’ Compensation Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this article are solely those of...
Oakland, CA – Migraine Drugs represented less than 1% of all prescriptions dispensed to California injured workers in 2023 but they consumed 4.7% of workers’ compensation drug payments, a nearly...
A Mississippi trial court committed error when it failed to grant summary judgment to an employer in a civil action filed by the estate of a deceased employee alleging false imprisonment and infliction of emotional distress where plaintiffs presented no evidence of actual intent on the part of the employer’s supervising staff. Plaintiffs alleged that the deceased, a housekeeping services employee, called them and indicated she was experiencing strong chest pains and that her supervisor would not let her leave. The employee further indicated that if she left, she would likely be fired because it was a fully booked holiday weekend. Plaintiffs alleged they sought to drive to the defendant’s place of business to pick up the employee, but that while they were en route a co-worker called to say the employee had collapsed. The employee died at a nearby hospital. Plaintiffs contended the action of the employer in not allowing her to leave amounted to false imprisonment. The appellate court said the plaintiffs could not merely stand on the pleadings; they needed to come forward with some evidence of actual intent. Without such evidence, the cause of action could not stand.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See The Service Cos., Inc. v. Estate of Vaughn, 2015 Miss. LEXIS 363 (July 23, 2015) [2015 Miss. LEXIS 363 (July 23, 2015)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 104.02 [104.02]
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site