Tag Archives: surveillance

Surveillance Video Sinks Ohio Claimant’s Odd-Lot Claim

Surveillance video spanning a period of almost three years that showed that the claimant, a former dockworker and truck driver, engaged in numerous physical activities, including riding a motorcycle, attending football games, yard work, and some lifting and bending activities … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Surveillance Video Sinks Ohio Claimant’s Odd-Lot Claim

NY Employer’s Surveillance of Injured Worker Fails to Establish Fraud

A New York appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that an employer’s surveillance videos and testimony of its private investigator, which primarily showed a workers’ compensation claimant sitting or standing outside a café smoking, talking … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on

NY Employer’s Surveillance of Injured Worker Fails to Establish Fraud

Iowa: Surveillance Videos of Injured Workers Not Protected by Work Product Privilege

A divided Court of Appeals of Iowa, in Iowa Insurance Institute v. Core Group of the Iowa Association for Justice, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 1067 (Oct. 29, 2014), has held that surveillance footage of injured workers is part of the … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Iowa: Surveillance Videos of Injured Workers Not Protected by Work Product Privilege

Louisiana Claimant Gets Hit With Forfeiture of Benefits and Stiff Penalties for Misrepresentations

A Louisiana appellate court has affirmed an Order of the state’s Office of Workers’ Compensation that heavily sanctioned a workers’ compensation claimant for fraud in violation of La. R. S. 23:1208 [Borders v. Boggs & Poole Contracting Group, Inc., 49,228 … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Louisiana Claimant Gets Hit With Forfeiture of Benefits and Stiff Penalties for Misrepresentations

Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator

Generally speaking, the insurance carrier (and any third-party administrator representing the carrier), while performing its proper role in the workers compensation claims process, shares the employer’s immunity to suit by an injured employee [see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 104.05[2]]. … Continue reading

Posted in Case comment | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator