Massachusetts Workers Compensation Lawyers Blog

September 13, 2014

Whigham v. Jackson Dawson Communications – Compensability for Injuries During Work-Related Extracurriculars

For the most part, courts have held that if a worker is hurt while participating in a voluntary but work-related event, injuries aren’t compensable under workers’ compensation laws. In weighing such a claim, courts will consider factors such as whether the function was truly considered voluntary, whether workers were paid and to what extent the employer benefited from the worker’s involvement.

Our Boston workers’ compensation attorneys know just because an employer formally labels a function “voluntary” doesn’t necessarily mean it is so, and there have been more than a few exceptions allowing for compensation for injuries sustained during work-related extracurricular activities.

A perfect recent example is in the case of Whigham v. Jackson Dawson Communications, before the South Carolina Supreme Court. Although this case took place outside the Massachusetts court system, the same general principles are still applicable. Both systems have found injuries are only compensable under workers’ compensation insurance when they occur during or arise in the course of one’s work duties.
Continue reading

September 9, 2014

Police Officers Accuse Workers’ Compensation Insurance Company of Unjust Denial of Claims

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent report from AZCentral.com, two police officers allege an insurance company contracted by the city has unjustly denied their respective workers’ compensation claims. As your Massachusetts workplace injury attorney understands, insurance companies routinely deny valid claims for their own financial benefit.

One of the workers is currently on unpaid leave and says that he is being forced to return to work before he is physically ready, because he cannot afford to care for his family without pay.

The officers suffered injuries in two separate accidents while on the job. One of the officers believes he was experiencing a celiac episode, so he went to the fire station to seek treatment. Walking through the door was the last thing he remembered. He woke up in the hospital and was told that he was found with his head and body pressed up against a wall. He suffered a vertebrae fracture and head injury.
Continue reading

September 7, 2014

Ekdahl v. Indep. Sch. Dist. #213: On Award Offsets in Workers’ Comp

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Ekdahl v. Indep. Sch. Dist. #213, an appeal from the Supreme Court of Minnesota, involved a relator injured while working for the respondent, an independent school district. The relator applied for permanent total disability and was awarded the workers’ compensation rating. The term “relator” is essentially the same as the term “plaintiff” in the context of this case. One distinction is that relators often sue organizations on behalf of another organization or the government in what is know as a Qui Tam lawsuit.

As your workplace injury attorney can explain, permanent total disability is a type of rating that an injured worker can be given when applying for benefits. This is one of the highest ratings for the purposes of obtaining a workers’ compensation award.

In Ekdahl, the respondent school district requested that the amount awarded to the relator be offset (reduced) because the injured worker had already received compensation under a government-service pension, and a state statute provided for any old age and survivor insurance benefits.
Continue reading

September 4, 2014

Yang v. Nissan N. Am., Inc.,: Mental and Physical Injuries in Workers’ Compensation Cases

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Yang v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., a case from the Tennessee Supreme Court, involved an employee who worked for a car manufacturer on an assembly line. After working for a few years without incident, the employee injured his left shoulder.

As a result of this injury, he was placed on restricted duty at the factory and had a job doing light janitorial work and some production duties. While working, he injured his right shoulder as a supervisor who wanted him to work faster was yelling at him.

He continued to work his light duty job until he needed surgery on both shoulders. After the surgery, according to the court records, he felt that he could not return to work, as there was nothing he could do in his condition. He also testified to becoming very depressed as result of his injuries.

Our Boston workplace accident lawyers understand that an on-the-job injury can lead to depression in addition to the physical condition. In Yang, the company offered him a buyout, and he left his job. He then filed for workers’ compensation benefits under a permanent disability rating for both his mental and physical conditions.
Continue reading

August 29, 2014

Miami Judge Demands Fixes for Workers’ Compensation System

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Workers’ compensation was created to provide employees with a quicker way to receive benefits after being injured on the job, while limiting the potential exposure of employers to negligence actions. As our work injury attorneys understand, the rights of employees often take a backseat to the desire for companies to reduce the cost of their insurance coverage, and you will have to fight for a fair and just recovery.

A recent article discusses how one Miami judge has ruled that state legislatures had reduced medical care and lost wage benefits to the level where workers who have been injured on the job are being deprived of fundamental rights. The judge held that the state law does not provide for benefits commensurate with the current high cost of medical care and does not provide workers with enough money to compensate them for lost wages.

The judge also noted that this workers’ compensation system was not meaningful enough to injured workers to justify the denial of their right to file a civil lawsuit. This speaks to the one recovery rule that prohibits a worker from filing a civil lawsuit if they are entitled to collect workers’ compensation. There are some exceptions to the rule barring a civil suit, if the employer engaged in serious misconduct, or if a third party is also liable for the on-the-job injury. We see this a lot in Boston workers’ compensation cases when an at-fault driver in a car accident injures an employee.
Continue reading

August 27, 2014

Injured Worker Flown to Boston Hospital after Wood Chipper Accident

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent article from Cape Cod Online, an employee of a tree company suffered a serious on-the-job injury. He was working on or around a wood chipper. After tree company workers remove dead limbs from trees, they will typically use a large wood chipper to shred the wood for easy removal from the job site.

Witnesses report that a large piece of wood was kicked out of the chipper and hit the worker in the back. The piece of wood was reported to approximately two feet long and a foot wide.

Due to the seriousness of the injury, the worker was flown by medevac helicopter to a trauma center in Boston. There have been no reports as of yet about the injured worker’s condition from the hospital, but it is likely life-threatening, based on the need to have him airlifted to Boston. Medevac helicopters are normally only used in cases of severe injury.

Our workplace accident lawyers know that some jobs are inherently more dangerous than others. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers tree trimming one of the more dangerous jobs and states that workers face injury from obvious sources, like falls, but also from hazardous electrical lines, heavy equipment, noise, chainsaws, ladders, and many other dangers. OSHA specifically lists wood chippers as a common hazard to tree trimmers.
Continue reading

August 25, 2014

Man Electrocuted in Construction Site Accident

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent article from My Edmonds News, a construction worker in Washington was killed in an on-the-job injury. According to witnesses, the man was working in a ditch with a compressed air tool when he hit an electrical line.

Witnesses heard a loud bang that may have been a transformer explosion. The worker was electrocuted and died on scene. The electrical disturbance resulted in a power outage to the area. The state department of labor and industries is investigating the accident. The medical examiner is also working to determine an official cause of death.

Your Boston workplace injury attorney know, while many do not think of workers’ compensation in the case of the death of a worker, as opposed to an injury, filing a workers’ compensation claim is often the appropriate action.
Continue reading

August 23, 2014

Massachusetts Construction Worker is Killed on the Job

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent article in the Metro West Daily News, a construction worker has died from his injuries sustained during employment at a job site in Framingham, Massachusetts, a suburb of Boston.

Witness are reporting the decedent was working at a university campus when he fell about 20 feet. He was airlifted by helicopter to a local trauma center, where he died from his injuries.

The contractor who had employed the worker said he was cutting metal pipes in the interior of a stairway at the time of his fall. The company said there was nobody else working in the area at time of the fatal accident. Local authorities, the district attorney and the Massachusetts Coalition for Occupational Safety and Health (MassCOAH) are investigating the accident. The investigators are waiting for the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner for the Commonwealth to release findings from the autopsy for any clues as to why the worker fell to his death. One can imagine that while the injuries were obviously caused by the fall, the autopsy may reveal pertinent information about his physical condition at the time of accident.

As our work injury lawyers know, falls are one of the more common reasons for on-the-job fatalities. According to a recent state report, nine out of 48 workplace deaths in Massachusetts were due to falls. Six of those nine deaths occurred in the construction industry.
Continue reading

August 21, 2014

Central OH Coal Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp.: Seeking Benefits from Ex-Employer

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Boston Workers’ compensation lawyers recognize some on-the-job injuries do not become apparent until much later in one’s life. If a work-related injury becomes apparent after one’s employment has been terminated, he or she may still be entitled to benefits. There may, however, be more work required to prove worker was injured on the job.

Central OH Coal Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs involved an employee who worked at an above-ground coalmine from 1945 until he was laid off in 1999. While he never worked underground, he held many different jobs at above-ground strip mines, including as a heavy equipment operator.

There is no doubt that he was exposed to coal dust on a daily basis at the same levels that he would have been at an underground mine. In 1995, he was diagnosed with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), which is also known by coalminers as “black lung.” He had also been a smoker for nearly 40 years, consuming more than a pack each day. The administrative law judge (ALJ) at his workers’ compensation hearing estimated that he smoked the equivalent of 57 “pack years” of cigarettes based, on the amount he smoked.

In 2001, he applied to get his job back, but was not hired because he couldn’t pass the required physical exam. The company believed that, even with his oxygen tank, he could not withstand the harsh environment of working at a coal mine.
Continue reading

August 18, 2014

LeFiell Mfg. v. Super. Ct.: Workers’ Compensation Exclusivity and Rare Exception

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Our workplace accident attorneys understand some employers take shortcuts when it comes to on-the-job safety. For employees working closely with heavy equipment, the result can be devastating.

LeFiell Mfg. v. Super. Ct., an appeal before the California Court of Appeals, involved a worker who was injured while operating a swaging machine. In rendering its opinion, the court wrote at great length about what a swaging machine is and how it works.

Essentially, a swaging machine is designed to take large diameter tubes and turn them into small diameter tubes. It is basically crimps a pipe fitting over another pipe fitting. You could use a swaging machine to attach the end to a hose, so that it could be connected to a faucet or another hose. The way the machine works is that a series of hammers compresses around the tube that is being crimped. The hammers are part of dye assembly that can be changed to match the diameter of the pipe or tube being reduced.
Continue reading