A US District Court ruled that a professional liability insurance company was permitted to rescind an attorney's policy for lack of notice. The attorney was instructed to appeal a workers' compensation claim and failed to do so on a timely basis, and did not provide notice to the professional liability insurance carrier under the terms of the policy, or in renewal applications, or when when requested on five occasions.
Liberty Mutual Underwriters, Inc., v Wolfe, et al., Civ. No. 16-2353 (WHW)(CLW) Decided 02/03/2017 (USDCT D.NJ) Unreported 2017 WL 481468
Showing posts with label Appeal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Appeal. Show all posts
Thursday, February 16, 2017
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Nebraska Appeal Dismissed - Failure to Exhaust Remedies
The failure to exhaust administrative remedies terminated an appeal to Nebraska Spring court. Today's post is shared from starherald.com
The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed an appeal Friday in a case involving a co-op employee who suffered a traumatic brain injury when he fell off a truck's flatbed.
The high court ruled that the Aurora Cooperative had filed its appeal too early, and sent the case back to a workers' compensation court for more deliberations.
John Jacobitz, of Milligan, was injured in August 2010 while cleaning up after a customer appreciation supper. Jacobitz and two other managers dropped off a grill in a company shed, and Jacobitz hopped onto the back of the flatbed truck for a ride back to the community center where the event was held, according to court records. He fell off in Ong after riding about half a block.
The dispute at trial focused on whether Jacobitz was acting within the scope of his job duties when the accident occurred. Jacobitz and the co-op disputed whether he was asked to help host the event, or whether he was told he could come if he wished. They also disputed whether the co-op or one of its vendors had sponsored the event.
A Nebraska workers' compensation judge ruled in Jacobitz's favor on Jan. 28, saying that he believed he had to attend the event for his job or that it was within his best interests to attend. The judge had not yet decided how much to award in benefits, but the co-op appealed the case.
"We conclude that the co-op has not appealed from a final order because the trial court has determined only...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Related articles
The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed an appeal Friday in a case involving a co-op employee who suffered a traumatic brain injury when he fell off a truck's flatbed.
The high court ruled that the Aurora Cooperative had filed its appeal too early, and sent the case back to a workers' compensation court for more deliberations.
John Jacobitz, of Milligan, was injured in August 2010 while cleaning up after a customer appreciation supper. Jacobitz and two other managers dropped off a grill in a company shed, and Jacobitz hopped onto the back of the flatbed truck for a ride back to the community center where the event was held, according to court records. He fell off in Ong after riding about half a block.
The dispute at trial focused on whether Jacobitz was acting within the scope of his job duties when the accident occurred. Jacobitz and the co-op disputed whether he was asked to help host the event, or whether he was told he could come if he wished. They also disputed whether the co-op or one of its vendors had sponsored the event.
A Nebraska workers' compensation judge ruled in Jacobitz's favor on Jan. 28, saying that he believed he had to attend the event for his job or that it was within his best interests to attend. The judge had not yet decided how much to award in benefits, but the co-op appealed the case.
"We conclude that the co-op has not appealed from a final order because the trial court has determined only...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Related articles
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Bill to protect texters who send messages to drivers is promised
A Republican assemblywoman from Monmouth County plans to introduce legislation to protect texters from being sued if they send a distracting message to a driver who gets into an accident. The bill, authored by Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande, comes in response to last week’s groundbreaking decision by two state appeals court judges who said texters who send messages to someone they know is driving have a responsibility to other drivers. “It is a sad state of affairs when a court believes that someone sending a text message can be held accountable if they have a special reason to know the recipient will be driving a vehicle and then read the message,” Casagrande said. “This legislation puts the responsibility where it belongs – in the front seat with the driver – not with the sender who can be held culpable for something beyond their control.” Last week’s ruling was the result of an appeal by a couple who were riding a motorcycle through Morris County in September 2009 when they collided with a pickup truck that had just crossed over a double center line. The couple, David and Linda Kubert, each lost a part of a leg in the crash. They sued driver Kyle Best of Wharton and Shannon Colonna, who sent Best a text message moments before the accident. A three-judge panel tossed out claims against Colonna, saying there was no evidence to suggest she knew Best was driving. However, two members of the appellate panel said... |
Related articles
- In California, Renewed Debate Over Home Care (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Truck Drivers Beware - Your Insurance May Not be What You Think (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Speed Camera Enforcement Will Begin on Sepember 9th, the First Day of School (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- 3 Responses for "What the Recent Data Breach Says About the State of Health IT" (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Mexican Consulate, Labor Dept. Partner On Worker Protection (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Judge Says Search Warrants for E-mails Must Be 'Limited' (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Drivers Over Age 55 Far More Likely to Die in Job Accidents Than Younger (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Incorrect Offset of Temporary Benefits
The incorrect offset of temporary Workers' Compensation benefits is not the basis for an interlocutory appeal ruled a NJ Appellate Court.
"Appellant Linda Scott appeals from a determination by the Judge of Compensation that her former employer, the County of Bergen (Bergen), is entitled to an offset pursuant to the provisions of N .J.S.A. 34:15-43 and N.J.S.A. 34:15-29, permitting Bergen to avoid the payment of temporary compensation benefits to appellant due to her receipt of an ordinary disability retirement pension from the Police and Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS). We dismiss this appeal as interlocutory because it does not present an issue that should be decided at this time and no application for leave to appeal was filed. R. 2:2-4.
"Leave to appeal was not sought nor does appellant argue such leave should be granted. Scott is receiving the ordinary disability pension; thus, the lack of additional funds from a temporary disability payment does not leave her destitute. This appeal neither presents a situation where the interests of justice require us to rule on the merits nor does it address a legal issue of general importance likely to recur often.
Scott v The County of Bergen, Not Reported in A.3d, 2011 WL 2651957 (N.J.Super.A.D.)
"Appellant Linda Scott appeals from a determination by the Judge of Compensation that her former employer, the County of Bergen (Bergen), is entitled to an offset pursuant to the provisions of N .J.S.A. 34:15-43 and N.J.S.A. 34:15-29, permitting Bergen to avoid the payment of temporary compensation benefits to appellant due to her receipt of an ordinary disability retirement pension from the Police and Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS). We dismiss this appeal as interlocutory because it does not present an issue that should be decided at this time and no application for leave to appeal was filed. R. 2:2-4.
"Leave to appeal was not sought nor does appellant argue such leave should be granted. Scott is receiving the ordinary disability pension; thus, the lack of additional funds from a temporary disability payment does not leave her destitute. This appeal neither presents a situation where the interests of justice require us to rule on the merits nor does it address a legal issue of general importance likely to recur often.
Scott v The County of Bergen, Not Reported in A.3d, 2011 WL 2651957 (N.J.Super.A.D.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)