By Robert G. Rassp, author of The Lawyer’s Guide to the AMA Guides and California Workers’ Compensation (LexisNexis) Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this treatise are...
Oakland, CA – Private self-insured claim volume in the California workers' compensation system fell 9.5% in 2023, producing the biggest year-to-year decline in private self-insured claim frequency...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board No matter the source of your media consumption, it seems that the topic...
By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Who doesn’t agree with the fact that “[w]e should not interpret or apply statutory language...
When do the exclusivity provisions of Labor Code section 3600 permit an action for law at damages? By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’...
An owner/employee’s decision to meet two subordinate employees for breakfast and a general business discussion meant that injuries sustained in a car accident on the way to the restaurant arose out of and in the course of the employment, in spite of the fact that the subject matter to be discussed was only tangential to the business of the employing company and likely would not have resulted in any work-related activity by anyone present at the meeting, held an Ohio court. Had he made it to the meeting, the owner/employee would have asked the other employees to perform services at a second, unrelated business also owned by the owner/employee. The appellate court held that the business meeting nevertheless served business-related purposes for the employing company, however, since the outside work would have given the subordinate employees additional income and would have eased the economic pain of the typical slow winter season experienced by the employing company.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Stewart v. Bear’s Tire, 2019-Ohio-1832, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 1914 (May 13, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 16.07
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see