Case Summaries

Workers' Comp

[11/12] Pratt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
In a suit against defendant-employer brought under the Federal Employers' Liability Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act for personal injuries suffered at work, a court order prohibiting defendant-railroad company from compelling plaintiff-employee to attend a medical examination or conducting a disciplinary hearing to terminate plaintiff's employment for refusing to provide it with medical evidence justifying his continued absence from work is affirmed where: 1) the trial court had jurisdiction to prohibit extra-judicial discovery because the civil rules of discovery provide independent authority to grant a protective order for misuse of the discovery process; and 2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding monetary sanctions where the sanctions served not to punish but rather to encourage voluntary compliance with the discovery procedures.

[11/06] B & D Contracting v. Pearley
In a challenge to the amount of an award of disability benefits pursuant to the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Act, employer's petition for review of the award is denied where employer's per diem payments to claimant were properly classified by the Benefits Review Board as wages, and were required to be included in benefit calculations as such.

[10/30] Power Fabricating, Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund
In an action for declaratory relief and damages arising from defendant's failure to defend plaintiff in action brought by widow of a worker who was fatally injured in an industrial accident, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) employer liability insurance (ELI) coverage can accrue only if (a) the worker was acting in the course and scope of employment of the insured and (b) workers' compensation law either does not apply to the situation or the employer may be sued in a capacity other than as an employer; and 2) because plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact on any of the conditions required in (b), ELI coverage could not be triggered.

[10/28] Stetzer v. Logistec of Connecticut, Inc.
Decision by defendant-Benefits Review Board regarding award of workers compensation under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. section 901 (2003) is affirmed where: 1) the prior award of benefits was unenforceable because the amount of compensation could not be determined without an additional ruling on disputed evidence that was not before the original administrative law judge; 2) the second law judge properly modified the original benefits award pursuant to 33 U.S.C. section 922; and 3) the court did not review the Board's decision attorney's fees because it was not final.

More...