|
|||
|
|
|
Miami Dolphins' player scores Pennsylvania jurisdiction over claim
When an injury occurs in Pennsylvania, a written agreement conferring jurisdiction in another state is unenforceable.
Case name: Newson v. Miami Dolphins, Ltd., 27 PAWCLR 191 (Pa. W.C.A.B. 2012). Ruling: The Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Appeal Board affirmed the workers' compensation judge's grant of a football player's claim petition.
Summary: The board found that the WCJ properly determined that Pennsylvania had jurisdiction over a football player's workers' compensation claim. A wide receiver and special teams player for the Miami Dolphins filed a claim petition alleging that he sustained a right knee injury with a torn MCL, ACL and patella tendon, and other internal damage. The WCJ determined that an implementation agreement between the player and the employer did not prohibit the player from filing a Pennsylvania workers' compensation claim, as the workers' compensation law is applicable to all injuries occurring within Pennsylvania no matter where the contract of hire is made, renewed, or extended. The WCJ granted the claim petition. The board affirmed, concluding that the player's injury was covered under workers' compensation because the work injury occurred in Pennsylvania. The implementation agreement, which provided for coverage for the employer's players under Florida's workers' compensation law, was unenforceable because the injury occurred in Pennsylvania. There was nothing in the agreement prohibiting a player from pursuing workers' comp benefits under a different state's law. Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage. January 28, 2013 Copyright 2013© LRP Publications |
|
|
|
Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved.
May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.
|