JOHN F. RENNER, Esq.
New Jersey Work Injury Lawyer

Burlington County Location:
525 Route 73 North
Suite 104
Marlton, NJ 08053
856.596.8000


Camden County Location:
111 White Horse Pike
Haddon Hts., NJ 08035
856.354.2000



View Larger Map

Archive for May 2008

NJ Work Injury Lawyers Consider Potential Denial…

May 26, 2008

NEW JERSEY WORK INJURY LAWYERS CONSIDER POTENTIAL DENIAL OF NJ WORKERS COMPENSATION BENEFITS ON THE BASIS OF SO-CALLED INTENTIONAL ACTS OF THE EMPLOYEE RESULTING IN THE INFLICTION OF THE INJURY.

 

New Jersey lawyers handling work accident cases have to consider whether the injury suffered by the work injury client is compensable under the Workers Compensation laws of the State of New Jersey. One issue that can arise is whether the injury is as a consequence of an intentional act of the employee which directly results in the injury complained of by the employee. One of the provisions of the NJ work accident law is that if the employee engages in an activity which intentionally injuries himself or herself or if the activity is substantially certain to result in injury to the employee, the injured worker is not entitled to benefits.

Previous cases by the Courts in New Jersey have resulted in the denial of benefits to an employee playing Russian roulette with a revolver while in an armored bank vehicle in which the gun discharged and injured the worker. Another case decided by the NJ Courts involved an employee enraged by his supervisors criticism to the point where he smashed his fist into an electrical box and consequently breaking bones in his hand was likewise denied benefits under the same doctrine. While the facts of each case present a different potential outcome, a potential injury can provide an employer with a successful defense to the claim of workers compensation benefits in New Jersey.

Legal Quote of the Week:

While the people retain their virtue and vigilance, no administration, by any extreme of wickedness or folly, can very seriously injure the government in the short span of four years.

Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861

NJ Work Injury Lawyers Consider Application…

May 26, 2008

NEW JERSEY WORK INJURY LAWYERS CONSIDER APPLICATION OF RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY DEFENSE TO ATTEMPTS BY EMPLOYERS TO DENY WORKERS COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO WORK ACCIDENT VICTIMS.

 

The general rule for work accident lawyers in New Jersey is that an employee engaged in a recreational activity not compelled by the employer which provides no benefit to the employer other than improvement in employee morale is not entitled to benefits under the New Jersey Workers Compensation law. Each case scenario is different and requires detailed analysis prior to making any determination regarding the application of benefits.

A potential exception to the general rule as discussed in some recent cases on the topic involves the use of compulsion by the employer to secure the injured employees participation in the event. Recent case law has emphasized that if employer compulsion exists for participation in an event that leads to an injury, the injured employee may be entitled to benefits under NJ Workers Compensation law. Hence, for example, compulsion may be found in the situation where a supervisor insists that the employee engage in the recreational activity or encourages beyond a mere invitation. If compulsion is found, benefits for the injured worker may follow.

Legal Quote of the Week:

I long have said there is no such thing as a hard case. I am frightened weekly but always when you walk up to the lion and lay hold the hide comes off and the same old donkey of a question of law is underneath.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, 1841-1935
Mark DeWolfe Howe, Holmes-Pollock Letters, 1946

NJ Work Injury Lawyers Review Recent Decision…

May 19, 2008

NEW JERSEY WORK INJURY LAWYERS REVIEW RECENT DECISION HOLDING THAT PETITIONER FAILED TO ESTABLISH A CONNECTION BETWEEN THE WORK ENVIRONMENT AND THE ALLEGED CANCER RESULTING FROM EXPOSURE IN THE WORK ENVIRONMENT AS AN OCCUPATIONAL HAZARD ALLOWING FOR THE AWARD OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BENEFITS.

 

If the Petitioner in a workers compensation case in New Jersey alleges that an occupational exposure (as opposed to a traumatic injury) caused a workplace injury, the Petitioner has the burden of establishing the casual connection between the workplace environment and the injury before the Judge of Compensation An award of benefits under the Workers Compensation statute requires the Judge to find the casual connection based upon the Petitioner’s proofs. In a recent case before a Judge of Compensation in New Jersey, the Judge failed to find such a connection between the Petitioner’s cancer and the work environment finding that Petitioner failed to prove the work environment was a substantial contributing cause or aggravation of the cancer.

The work environment in the case before the Judge of Compensation involved a worker exposed to asbestos but the Petitioner rarely had the opportunity to enter the area of the building containing that hazardous substance. An expert on behalf of the Petitioner testified but the Judge of Compensation failed to find the basis of the opinion to be persuasive given the other evidence produced during the trial.

Legal Quote of the Week:

When there is room for question, something is wrong.

Jewish folk saying, Joseph L. Baron, A Treasury of Jewish Quotations, 1956