Goulding v. NJ Friendship House, Inc.

In Goulding v. NJ Friendship House, Inc., the New Jersey Supreme Court reviewed a workers’ compensation court’s ruling in favor of an employer after an employee was injured during the company’s “Family Fun Day”. The Court ruled that N.J.S.A. 34:15-7 sets out a two-element test to determine if an employer is liable for an employee’s injury … Read more

Lapsley v. Twp. of Sparta

In Lapsley v. Twp. of Sparta, the Appellate Division reviewed an award of the Division of Workers’ Compensation for injuries suffered by a public librarian when she was struck by a snowplow while leaving work. The Workers’ Compensation judge held that the injury occurred on the employer’s premises because the librarian was in a parking … Read more

Sadler v. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd.

In Sadler v. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd., the Pennsylvania Supreme Court determined that the Workers’ Compensation Act permits beneficiaries to receive benefits while in pre-conviction incarceration. In this case, the employee was injured, and the employer acknowledged he was entitled to a weekly disability wage. But soon thereafter, the employee was arrested. Unable to post … Read more

Wilson v. Dir., Off. of Workers’ Comp. Programs

The 3rd Circuit appears to have closed out 2020 with a bang: it changed the style of its opinions. It’s first published opinion under the new format is Wilson v. Dir., Off. of Workers’ Comp. Programs. That case deals with the hot-button issue of what constitutes “navigable waters” under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation … Read more

Dobransky v. EQT Production

In Dobransky v. EQT Production, the Superior Court ruled that a person who merely drives a truck to deliver a single raw material to a well site is not a person whose work consists of “the removal, excavation, or drilling of soil, rock, or minerals” within Section 302(a) of the Workers’ Compensation Act.

Hocutt v. Manda Supply Co.

In Hocutt v. Manda Supply Co., the Appellate Division affirmed an order granting summary judgment. Because the plaintiff was a “special employee,” the exclusive remedy for his workplace injury was workers’ compensation. Moreover, the defendant’s alleged conduct was not excepted from workers’ compensation because the conduct was not sufficiently egregious to rise to the level … Read more

Asbury Park v. Star Ins. Co.

In Asbury Park v. Star Ins. Co., a firefighter was justly compensated for his work-related injuries, but the workers’ comp payout caused a fight between Asbury Park and its insurance carrier. In this certified question from the 3rd Circuit, the NJ Supreme Court held that the contract between the insured city and the insurer controlled … Read more

Dana Holding Corp. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Brd.

While the instant action was proceeding on direct appeal, the Supreme Court ruled in Protz v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board, 161 A.3d 827 (Pa. 2017) that a certain portion of workers’ compensation benefits statutory law was unconstitutional. The claimant in the instant matter properly raised and preserved the same issue for his case and now … Read more

NJ Transit Corp. v. Sanchez

NJ Transit paid out a workers’ comp claim to one of its employees who was rear-ended. NJ Transit then sought to recoup the benefits from the at-fault driver’s employer, as the at-fault driver had been working, as well. The trial court, however, held that New Jersey’s no-fault insurance scheme under the Auto Insurance Cost Recovery … Read more