Month: July 2012

Jul 29, 2012

VA: Virginia Court Mischaracterizes “Actual Risk” Test in Determining Legal Causation, Yet Offers Motherly Advice: “Waiters, Take Small Bites!”

Affirming a decision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that had denied benefits to a restaurant host/waiter who injured his esophagus while attempting to swallow a bite of quesadilla that...

VA: Virginia Court Mischaracterizes “Actual Risk” Test in Determining Legal Causation, Yet Offers Motherly Advice: “Waiters, Take Small Bites!” VA: Virginia Court Mischaracterizes “Actual Risk” Test in Determining Legal Causation, Yet Offers Motherly Advice: “Waiters, Take Small Bites!”
Jul 13, 2012

South Carolina: Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim in Connection With Fatal Shooting of Suspect Is Not Compensable–No “Extraordinary or Unusual Employment Condition” Existed

On Wednesday, a divided Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed a unanimous finding of an Appellate Panel of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission that a deputy sheriff failed to meet...

South Carolina: Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim in Connection With Fatal Shooting of Suspect Is Not Compensable–No “Extraordinary or Unusual Employment Condition” Existed

South Carolina: Deputy Sheriff’s PTSD Claim in Connection With Fatal Shooting of Suspect Is Not Compensable–No “Extraordinary or Unusual Employment Condition” Existed

Jul 12, 2012

Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege

With one justice dissenting, the Supreme Court of Texas recently held that in a bad faith action brought by an injured employee against a workers’ compensation insurer, the attorney—client privilege...

Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege
Jul 4, 2012

New Jersey: OSHA Violation is Insufficient to Show Necessary Level of “Intent” to Support Tort Claim Against Employer

As noted in my June 6, 2012 discussion of Estes v. Airco Serv., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72134 (N.D. Okla., May 24, 2012), below, an important exception to the...

New Jersey: OSHA Violation is Insufficient to Show Necessary Level of “Intent” to Support Tort Claim Against Employer New Jersey: OSHA Violation is Insufficient to Show Necessary Level of “Intent” to Support Tort Claim Against Employer