Tag Archives: intentional injury

Missouri Court Stresses Importance of Injury “by Accident” in Recent Horseplay Case

The Missouri Court of Appeals recently affirmed a decision of that state’s Labor and Industrial Relations Commission that had denied workers’ compensation benefits to a tire shop employee who sustained severe burns when he used a lighter to ignite a … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Missouri Court Stresses Importance of Injury “by Accident” in Recent Horseplay Case

Washington Appellate Court Again Says “Tasered Trooper’s” Tort Action Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Defense

Did Intermediate Appellate Court Abide by Supreme Court’s Remand Instructions? In a case that has ricocheted from a Washington state trial court to an intermediate appellate court and from that appellate court to the Supreme Court of Washington and back again, the … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Washington Appellate Court Again Says “Tasered Trooper’s” Tort Action Not Barred by Exclusive Remedy Defense

Divided Washington Court Again Refuses to Adopt Substantially Certain Test

A divided Supreme Court of Washington, noting that in Birklid v. Boeing Co., 127 Wn.2d 853, 904 P.2d 278 (1995) [see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 103.04[3][c]], it had earlier refused to adopt the “substantially certain” test in defining deliberate … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Divided Washington Court Again Refuses to Adopt Substantially Certain Test

North Carolina: Intentional Tort Action Against Wal-Mart Related to Death of Wal-Mart “Greeter” Barred by Exclusivity

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeals of North Carolina affirmed a trial court’s order granting various defendants’ motions for summary judgment on exclusivity grounds in a wrongful death action filed by the administratrix of the estate of a Wal-Mart employee … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on North Carolina: Intentional Tort Action Against Wal-Mart Related to Death of Wal-Mart “Greeter” Barred by Exclusivity

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 exclusive remedy rule relates to intentional injury inflicted by the … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on New Jersey: OSHA Violation is Insufficient to Show Necessary Level of “Intent” to Support Tort Claim Against Employer