SafetyLitigation.com
content top

California Court Provides Guidance On “Point Of Operation Guard” Exception Under Workers’ Compensation Law

A California appellate court dismissed an action brought under a state law exception to the workers’ compensation exclusivity rule, by which an employee may sue his employer if he was “injured as a result of the employer’s knowing removal of, or knowing failure to install, a point of operation guard on a power press.”  The dismissal further defined a “point of operation guard” under...

Sixth Circuit Rejects Argument That ALJ Required To Explain How Aboveground Mining Conditions Were Substantially Similar To Underground Mine

To establish a rebuttable presumption of pneumoconiosis, a claimant can prove that he or she has a totally disabling respiratory or pulmonary impairment and spent at least 15 years working in an underground coal mine or “in coal mines other than underground mines in conditions substantially similar to those in underground mines.”  20 C.F.R. § 718.305(b)(1).  The U.S. Department of...

PHMSA Issues Final Rule Prohibiting Hazmat Operations By Persons With Unpaid Civil Penalties

Yesterday, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a final rule prohibiting companies who fail to pay a civil penalty as ordered, or who fail to abide by a payment agreement, from performing activities regulated by the Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR Parts 171-180) until payment is made.  The rulemaking was conducted pursuant to the Moving...

Case Against Landfill Operator Involving Waste From January Chemical Leak In West Virginia Proceeds

The chemical leak that contaminated the drinking water for thousands of residents around Charleston, West Virginia in January continues to spring new litigation despite the owner of the storage site having filed for bankruptcy.  One of the nearby county commissions and a town within that county filed suit in May against the operator of a landfill where 228 tons of waste containing the...

Second Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment Opinion Allocating Financial Responsibility For April 2006 Texas Train Derailment

In an April 2006 train derailment near Dallas, much of a train’s cargo, which included tractors, copying machines, and other manufactured goods, was destroyed.  The goods were manufactured in Japan, shipped across the Pacific, and loaded onto railcars in California.  Following the derailment, the Japanese insurers, who were subrogees of the cargo owners, filed suit against the...

« Older Entries Next Entries »