» Workers Compensation

D.C. Workers' Compensation Defense: Key events every adjuster should know

As the Court of Appeals frequently notes in decisions concerning the D.C. Workers’ Compensation Act, the Act is to be liberally construed in keeping with its humanitarian purpose of providing financial and medical benefits to workers who injured in the course of their employment. See, e.g. Grayson v. DOES, 516 A.2d 909, 9… Read More
Read More

Employee’s disclaimer of third party tort action against employer’s customers upheld by D.C. Court

In Brown v. 1301 K Street Limited Partnership, No. 09-CV-695 (D.C. Nov. 23, 2011), the D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the validity of a disclaimer signed by a security guard, in which she agreed that her workers’ compensation benefits from her employer would be her sole remedy and that she waived any rights she had to m… Read More
Read More

Tolling the statute of limitations for change-in-condition applications under Virginia Act

In Ford Motor Company v. Gordon, 281 Va. 543, 708 S.E. 2d 846 (2011), the Court considered the proper interpretation of Va. Code sec. 65.2-708(A) and 65.2-708(C), which govern the tolling of the statute of limitations for filing a change-in-condition application for workers’ compensation benefits. The Court held that… Read More
Read More

Virginia Workers Compensation:  Court affirms successful res judicata defense

In Brock v. Voith Siemen Hydro Power Generation et al., No. 0428-11-3 (Va. App. Nov. 1, 2011), the Court affirmed a decision by the Virginia Workers Compensation Commission that the claimant was barred by res judicata from litigating injuries he alleged in his initial claim but did not raise at his evidentiary hearing. As a… Read More
Read More

Presumption that death on the job was work-related held not to apply in Virginia comp appeal

In Puller v. Fairfax County School Board, No. 0886-11-4 (Va. App. 2011), the Court affirmed the Commission’s denial of workers’ compensation benefits to a widow whose husband died of a heart attack while performing his job as a mail delivery truck driver. The decedent, who worked for the School Board, was found… Read More
Read More

Virginia Workers Compensation award reversed because employer had insufficient number of employees

In Ragland v. Muguruza, No. 0524-11-4 (Va. App. 2011), the Court reversed the Virginia Workers Compensation Commission’s award of benefits, on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence that Ragland, the employer, had three or more employees “regularly in service” at the time of the accident, and thu… Read More
Read More

D.C. Workers Compensation:  Court of Appeals rejects objective standard for mental disability claims

In Muhammad v. District of Columbia Depart. Of Emp. Serv., No. 10-AA-1049 (D.C. Jan. 5, 2012), the claimant had suffered a back injury on the job and was on temporary total disability. After three years, the employer enrolled the claimant in vocational rehabilitation, in an effort to find him sedentary work. After a year of… Read More
Read More

Maryland Act construed to include loss of overtime pay in loss of “wage earning capacity”

In Montgomery County v. Deibler, ___ A.2d. ___ (Md. Oct. 27, 2011), the Maryland Court of Appeals considered the issue whether the term “wage earning capacity” in L.E. sec. 9-615(a)(1) includes the capacity to earn overtime compensation so that the Commission may include such compensation in the determination of… Read More
Read More

Suicide of another held not to support negligence action in District of Columbia

In Rollins v. Wackenhut Services, No. 10-00047 (D.D.C. Aug. 10, 2011), the court dismissed wrongful death and survival actions brought against an employer and a pharmaceutical company by the mother of a twenty-three year old man who was working as an armed security guard when he committed suicide with his work-issued pistol… Read More
Read More

Virginia Court of Appeals nixes 6 person spa pool as treatment under workers compensation

In Portsmouth School Board v Harris, No. 0026-11-1 (Va. App. July 19, 2011), the Court reversed a decision by the Virginia Workers Compensation Commission, which held that the employer was responsible for paying for a six-person spa pool purchased by the claimant, as physician-ordered treatment which was reasonable, necessa… Read More
Read More