Publications
Legal Updates for Lawyers’ Professional Liability - RESULTS & THOUGHT LEADERSHIP*
LAWYERS' PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY RESULTS*
Josh J.T. Byrne (Philadelphia, PA)
LAWYERS’ PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY THOUGHT LEADERSHIP
Legal Update for Lawyers’ Professional Liability – February 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments
Legal Updates for Lawyers’ Professional Liability - CASE LAW UPDATE
In Law Office of Drew J. Bauman v. Hanover Insurance Company, 2023 WL 2238552 (D.N.J. February 27, 2023), the plaintiffs maintained a professional liability insurance policy with the Hanover defendants from October 2017 to October 2019.
Legal Update for Lawyers’ Professional Liability – February 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments
New ABA Formal Ethics Opinion on Attorney Office Sharing Arrangements
The American Bar Association recently issued a Formal Ethics Opinion addressing the ethics of attorney office sharing arrangements.
Legal Update for Lawyers’ Professional Liability – February 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments
Delaware Superior Court affirms an Industrial Accident Board decision that a claimant injured while performing an employer-related volunteer activity was not within the course and scope of employment.
Ms. Testa-Carr worked as a customer service representative for Sallie Mae. On March 21, 2022, she was fell down some stairs and was injured while delivering Meals on Wheels to an apartment in Newark.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Judges of compensation claims have the authority to take a flexible and holistic approach to permanent total disability claims as the triers of fact. The Blake methods are guidelines, not requirements.
The employer/carrier in this matter appealed the judge of compensation claims’ award of permanent total disability (PTD) benefits.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Appellate Divisions affirms a workers’ compensation judge’s decision that the claimant’s testimony was not credible and his medical expert’s theory was not supported by objective evidence.
The Appellate Division affirmed the workers’ compensation order denying the petitioner’s motion for medical/temporary benefits.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Appellate Division confirms that the trial judge correctly applied the intentional-wrong exception to the insurer’s policy.
The Appellate Division affirmed the Law Division order granting Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co.’s motion to dismiss and denying Sir Electric, LLC’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board did not err in granting employer’s petition for a de novo hearing to present after-discovered evidence of a medical provider’s prohibited self-referral to a pharmacy that a workers’ compensation judge would not allow.
The claimant settled a 2010 work injury by Compromise and Release Agreement (C&R) in 2017. The C&R stated the employer reserved the right to either continue paying medical benefits or to fund a Medicare Set-Aside (MSA).
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Although claimant cannot be working with a concurrent employer on date of work injury with another employer, the relationship with the concurrent employer was sufficiently intact that concurrent wages must be included in calculating average weekly wage.
The claimant sustained an injury on December 29, 2018, while working as a home health aide. The claim was accepted by the employer, and the claimant began receiving benefits at the rate of $468 per week, based on an average weekly wage of $520.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.