The court reversed the ruling of the lower courts and affirmed the standard by which workplace injuries due to everyday movements should be reviewed.

The South Carolina Supreme Court looked at the Joint Employer Doctrine to determine if both employers would be held responsible for the workers' injuries.

The court ruled in that way because traveling employees are governed by slightly different rules from regular employees.

The employer mailed a notice of intent to contest the claim just before the deadline, but it was not received by the Workers' Compensation Commission until after the deadline.

Is the mere presence of an increased risk in a person's work environment sufficient to connect that person's injuries to their employment for workers compensation purposes?

Can an employer who neglected to purchase a workers compensation policy entitled to coverage under a CGL policy?

When a company owner underreports payroll for an extended period, it adds up.

A discussion of a news release published by DSHS reminding insurers of their requirement to report certain claims.

When an employee is injured at work by a power line touching a vehicle, which coverage applies?