The plaintiff in this action, Mr. Bell, is requesting from the Commission, to award compensation for his injury under the Worker’s Compensation Act. Mr. Bell, will be referred to as Bell, filed a workers’ compensation claim against defendant, Safe Place Children’s Home, which will be referred to as the Safe Place. Bell subsequently submitted a claim to the Safe Place human resources department and was denied. Bell’s injury is compensable because Safe Place mandated Bell’s physical presence and participation in a football game at an annual picnic which benefited Safe Place by socializing, boosting morale, and team building. An injury arises out of employment when the employee is expressly mandated at the recreational and social event and the …show more content…
Barbour Boat Works, 352 S.E.2d 690, 694 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
The first element has already been addressed because both parties agree that the injury suffered was an accident. (Bell Aff. Ex. 6.) Therefore, in order for an injury to be compensable a plaintiff must prove the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.
I. BELL SUFFERED AN INJURY WHILE AT SAFE PLACE ANNUAL PICNIC THAT AROSE FROM EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE SAFE PLACE BENIFITED FROM THE EVENT BY ATTENDING THE PICNIC, BOOSTING MORALE AND TEAM BUILDING AND THERE WAS A CAUSAL AND THERE WAS A CONNECTION BETWEEN THE INJURY AND THE EMPLOYEMENT WHICH WAS A RISK OF THE EMPLOYMENT.
A. Bell’s injury arose out of employment because Safe Place benefitted from the event where Mr. Bell was expected to be and the purpose of the football game was to boost morale in addition to team building with the caregivers whom he
…show more content…
Holliday v. Tropical Nut & Fruit Co., 775 S.E.2d 885, 895 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015). Additionally, the employer did not clearly inform the attendees that only their attendance, rather than physical participation in the recreational event, was mandatory. Id. Testimony by employer said attendance was mandated and followed by taking attendance. Id. Additionally, the employer testified the employee was mandated to participated by expressly stating to employees “wanted people to participate.” Id. The court reasoned since the employee was required to attend the event by their employer, the courts held the totality of the circumstances surrounding the purpose of and expectations surrounding the participation therein points in favor a determination for the employee’s injury arose from his employment.
Note and answer to yourself, the factor that are involved at the incident, the mechanisms and circumstances on the injury, as well as the extent and type of injury. Assessing the situation identify what happened, a number of people involved, as their age, there is a child and or elderly.
US Supreme Court in 1927, in the case Buck v. Bell put a legal example that states can sterilize public institutions inmates (Lombardo, 2009). The argument of the court was that epilepsy, feeblemindedness, and imbecility are hereditary and it was important to the inmates from passing these defects to other generations. May 2nd 1927, the court ordered Buck Carrie, whom it referred as a feebleminded daughter to get sterilization following the 1924 Virginia act of Eugenical Sterilization. Carrie had a feebleminded daughter and her mother was feebleminded too. The case determined that obligatory sterilization laws did not infringe the due process given by the US constitution 14th amendment. It established the legal mandate and bolstered US eugenics movement for sterilizing over 60,000 citizens in over thirty states. Most of these practices ended in 1970s (Reilly, 1991).
Plaintiff Debra Denise Gregg filed a sexual harassment suit for violations of Title VII, and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act against Hay-Adams Hotel. She sought $1,000,000 in compensatory damages and $1,000,000 for damages resulting from emotional distress and $1,000,000 in punitive damages. Plaintiff Anthony Gregg brought the claim for damages resulting from loss of companionship and consortium in the amount of $1,000,000. The judges dismissed the case on the grounds that the plaintiff’s accounts lacked consortium and that the facts did not support her claims for emotional distress and punitive damage.
The second issue is whether or not the defendant has an obligation to reimburse for an injury. The outcome of this second issue depends whether or not it is rational for the defendant to have to pa...
This case implicates employees who did not get legitimate meal periods or rest breaks. The laborers were demanded to stay vigilant continually and execute a number of extra errands while on the interstate with no leisure time to rest or eat. This is an infraction of the Labor’s Wage and Hour Division; therefore, the claimant’s claim asserted for “$874,775.70 for overtime pay, $422,536.75 in interest benefits, and $799,155.98” for attorney’s stipends and restitutions (LexisNexis, 2011).
What uncompensated work did the plaintiff claim she performed? What should the district court have done with the statement of another employee that the plaintiff did not engage in work prior to her official start time?
Unit 6 Case 5 – Worker’s Compensation Nurse Jane Smith is a 30-year employee of the Medical-Surgical Unit and injured her back transferring a post-op 250-lb patient from the gurney to the bed. Her co-workers who were present heard her complain about the pain in her leg immediately after the patient transfer. She did not report the injury at the time, but two days later, when she was unable to get out of bed due to back spasms, she called her nurse manager and reported the injury. Answer the following questions based upon your knowledge of worker’s compensation both from the literature and from your place of employment:
In the case Lechmere, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 502 U.S. 527 (1992), Lechmere was a large retail store located in a plaza that also contained several smaller satellite stores. In this case the union filed an unfair labor practice against Lechmere for violating Section 7 of the NLRA for not allowing its non-employee organizers to distribute literature on the companies parking lot. There was not sufficient area for on public property for these organizers to be able to speak with employees. In this case the NLRB ruled in favor of the union stating that “The right to distribute is not absolute, but must be accommodated to the circumstances, where it is impossible or unreasonably difficult for a union to distribute organizational literature to employees entirely off the employer’s premises, distribution on a nonworking area, such as the parking lot and the walkways between the parking lot and the gate, may be warranted.”
Tort law is a very prevalent aspect of conducting business and daily life in the twenty first century. According to the textbook, The Legal Environment of Business, tort law provides “remedies for the invasion of various protected interests.” (Cross & Miller, 2012) In this essay about tort law, I will talk about a tort case that has personally impacted me. To do so, I will provide a background of the event, apply facts of the case to applicable law, summarize lessons of the week as they relate to this case and provide a plausible argument for the parties involved.
I believe $110,000 is a fair compensation, it’s a 10% higher than the median salary for an MBA that graduated from Harvard in the Health related services industry. He will be working directly with the CEO, so right from the start he will have more responsibilities and impact than other managers that start at the company, I believe this deserves that extra 10%. I also believe, that when you are determining your own compensation, it’s better to put more focus on the compensations attached to results, that shows your commitment to the company and that you are not interested in the easy money.
House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case, which originated out of a Tennessee trial court murder conviction and death sentence (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008). The case started with the murder of Carolyn Muncey late on the night of July 14, 1985, or in the early morning hours of July 15, 1985. Muncey disappeared from her home, and was found dead the next day, with her body having been dumped down an embankment and covered with brush and limbs. The defendant, Paul Gregory House, was seen in the area of the body dump site, on July 15, 1985, carrying a black rag, and reportedly coming up the embankment, in the area where Muncey’s body was later located (House v. Bell, 2006). Evidence collected from the body of
Few genres have such a distinctive look and feel as noir fiction. Some of its features include - seedy urban underbellies, trench-coat-clad private investigators, cigarettes, femme fatales, nihilistic emptiness, loveless sex and unhappy endings. The characters of noir fiction are incredibly unpleasant and so is the overall tone of the genre, yet the genre is undeniably compelling and has an allure like no other genre ever will. ‘Double Indemnity’ by James M. Cain is a prime example of noir fiction at its finest. It certainly consists of all the noir conventions - Walter Huff plays the role of the conflicted anti hero and Phyllis Nirdlinger is the deadly femme fatale who uses her sexuality to manipulate the protagonist.
Many employers have been baffled as they attempt to sort through the overlapping obligations created when a sick or injured worker's medical condition triggers the different rights and responsibilities under new federal laws. If businesses want to avoid costly lawsuits from disgruntled employees it is essential to understand their responsibilities under the laws. Employers must make a tw...
Chapter 19. p413. John G.Fleming [4] P419. Textbook on Torts 8th edition. Michael A.Jones [5] Vicarious Liability for Employers. Andrew Scott-Howman.
During the nineteenth and early twentieth century if a worker was a victim of workplace accident there was no compensation or requirement of the employer to support rehabilitation. Employers were not responsible for injured workers or accidents that happened in the workplace. The main legal doctrine of Assumption of Risk governed workplace hazards, which required workers to assume and accept all the risks affiliated with their occupation (Share, 2012). In the 1900 's many diseases and injuries resulted due to unsafe or hazardous working condition. "The Royal Commission on the Relations of Labour and Capital reported in 1889 that many workers were being hurt on the job and condemned the state of working conditions in several industries" (CPHA, 2012). However, the federal government at the time did not act on the results of the commission report. In 1914, the province of Ontario introduced legislation where, "workers would be eligible for guaranteed no-fault benefits from a system that was wholly funded by employers. In exchange, employers were freed from legal liability" (CPHA, 2012). This was the first time the idea came up that injured employees should be compensated no matter who was at fault for the accident. This was the sign of the beginnings of change, but perspectives on health and safety still held employees responsible and accountable for all injuries and