Gadsden Personal Injury Lawyer - Compensation

Workers’ Compensation and Third Party Claims

Jason Knowles — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:45:35 GMT

Workers’ compensation statutes are designed to require employers to compensate employees who are injured while working in the line and scope of their employment, regardless of whether the employer is at fault. Many employees are surprised to learn, however, that workers’ compensation benefits are not intended to make the employee whole.

Although workers’ compensation statutes vary among the states, they are basically similar with respect to benefits available to injured employees. Medical benefits are provided for life, although the insurer controls in large part where and under what circumstances the medical care is provided. While the employee is out of work due to their injury, they are only paid 2/3 of their normal wages. Compensation for permanent injuries are capped at 300 weeks unless the employee is totally and permanently disabled. Workers’ compensation statutes do not provide benefits for past or future pain and suffering, past or future mental or emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and punitive damages are not available.

Therefore, given the shortcomings of workers’ compensation benefits, it is extremely important for injured workers, with the assistance of an attorney, to evaluate work-related claims to determine if a third-party (someone other than the employer) may be liable to the employee. For example, a third party claim may be available against the designer, manufacturer, seller and/or assembler of a defective machine or equipment that injured or killed the employee. Or a claim may be available against a third party whose negligence caused the employee’s injury or death. In these situations, pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, lost income and punitive damages are recoverable.

When employees are injured on the job, they and their lawyers should examine the facts and circumstances to determine if third party claims are viable. Such an analysis could make a huge financial difference in the recovery.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jason Knowles

What Is A Statute Of Limitations?

Michael Roberts — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:33:53 GMT

If you might have to file a lawsuit on any type of claim, whether it involves an injury from an accident, or a debt that someone owes you, it is very important to be mindful that there are deadlines for filing of a lawsuit.

Each state has a different set of rules, and there are many different deadlines, depending on the type of case. For example, in Alabama, the deadline for filing a negligence claim is generally two years from the date of the accident on which the negligence claim is based. A claim for breach of contract, however, is generally longer. There are rare exceptions that can sometimes apply to change the deadlines imposed by statutes of limitations. For example, sometimes a minor child will have a longer period of time in which to file a suit than an adult.

When a governmental entity, such as a city or county is involved, there can be deadlines which are even shorter than the statute of limitations. For example, in Alabama, a verified claim must be filed with the city clerk within six months from the date the claim arises (which generally would be the time of the accident, if it is an accident case), and a claim against a county must be filed with the county commission within one year.

In Alabama, a suit for worker’s compensation benefits must be filed within two years from the date of the accident, although there can be an extension if the employer or the worker’s compensation insurance company makes payment of compensation benefits after the accident.

There are also certain situations where there are statutes of “repose” or rules of “repose” which can create other, and different deadlines, some of which operate very harshly upon the rights of someone who is injured because of a condition created a long time earlier.

Because of the complexity of the rules and exceptions dealing with statutes of limitations, claims requirements, and other laws, anyone who may have to file a lawsuit should obtain legal advice as early as possible. For further discussion of Alabama’s statutes of limitations, see Alabama Tort Law, 4th Edition, Chapter 46.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Roberts

Injured Employees Should Look for Third Party Liability in Work-Related Accidents

Jason Knowles — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:36:44 GMT

A worker who is injured in an on-the-job accident can file a claim for workers’ compensation benefits but typically, at least in Alabama, the recovery in that sort of claim is woefully inadequate to compensate an injured worker. Workers should therefore be aware that a third party, other than the employer, may be responsible for the worker’s injury, in which case the recovery is often greater.

When an injured worker comes to our firm, we fully investigate the cause of injury to determine if a third party was responsible for the worker’s injury. Often we discover that a defective machine, for example, was the cause of the injury. Often, injury-causing machines are defective in that that they are not properly designed to eliminate or prevent hazards or they are not equipped with proper warnings about the hazard. Sometimes a third party is liable when, for example, their employee caused the accident and resulting injuries, such as in a two vehicle crash. Many other types of negligence by third-parties may give the injured worker a cause of action.

So, workers injured on the job should be aware that they have options which may significantly aid them above and beyond the workers’ compensation laws.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jason Knowles

Arkansas Court Rules Injury not Work Related, Workers' Comp Denied

Chrissie Cole — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:04:25 GMT

The Arkansas Court of Appeals ruled a school custodian who was injured while parking his car on campus after running a personal errand, should not receive workers' compensation benefits.

The ruling, on Wednesday, reversed a state Workers' Compensation Commission decision, which had decided the employee, had returned to his employer's premises and was on-call at the time of the accident.

The employee was injured when he opened the gate to the parking lot and the gate fell on him, breaking his leg in two places. He was trying to park his vehicle in the gated section because the lot he usually used was blocked by a truck.

He applied for benefits but the district denied his application saying he was not performing employment services when he was injured.

The Workers' Compensation Commission reversed the administrative law judge's decision, saying at the time of his injury, Conner had returned to his employer's premises and was providing a service to his employer by allowing access to the parking lot.

The appeals court, in a 4-2 decision Wednesday, ruled the activity Conner was performing when he was injured "was not inherently necessary to perform his job."

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Chrissie Cole