Tag: Federal

Jun 18, 2018

Maine Employer Need Not Pay for Injured Worker’s Medical Marijuana

In a case of first impression within the state, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, in a 5-2 decision, Bourgoin v. Twin Rivers Paper Co., LLC, 2018 ME 77, 187...

Maine Employer Need Not Pay for Injured Worker’s Medical Marijuana Maine Employer Need Not Pay for Injured Worker’s Medical Marijuana
Apr 2, 2015

Federal Court Must Sever and Remand Oklahoma Retaliatory Discharge Claim

On Tuesday, a federal district court in Oklahoma, noting that claims arising under the workers’ compensation laws of any state are not removable under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1445(c), held that...

Federal Court Must Sever and Remand Oklahoma Retaliatory Discharge Claim Federal Court Must Sever and Remand Oklahoma Retaliatory Discharge Claim
Jan 12, 2015

For Now, Exclusivity Does Not Bar Workers’ Tort Cases Against BP Products Following 2011 Chemical Release at Refinery

A Federal District Court in Texas has refused to grant a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant BP Products North America, Inc. (“BP Products”) in a civil action arising...

For Now, Exclusivity Does Not Bar Workers’ Tort Cases Against BP Products Following 2011 Chemical Release at Refinery For Now, Exclusivity Does Not Bar Workers’ Tort Cases Against BP Products Following 2011 Chemical Release at Refinery
Jun 6, 2012

US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers

An important exception to the exclusive remedy rule relates to intentional injury inflicted by the employer on an employee. Several legal theories have been advanced to support the exception. The...

US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers US: 2010 Statutory Amendment Spelled “Certain” Demise of Oklahoma’s “Substantially Certain” Rule in Intentional Injury Actions Against Employers