Death claim

Home » Blog » death claim

SOCIAL WORKER TRAGICALLY DIES: INJURED WORKER IN THE NEWS, #123

Posted on June 20, 2024 by Edward Singer

A Social Worker tragically died. Per the Nypost.com, the Social Worker knocked on the wrong door during an in-field appointment to visit a client. As a result of this, the Social Worker was assaulted. The individual l repeatedly punched her. He then kicked her with heavy boots. She sustained a severe brain bleed, swelling of the brain, and multiple facial fractures. She survived for approximately one month before dying.

This case will be analyzed under California Workers’ Compensation Law.

If the Social Worker knocked on the Wrong Door, Does That Matter?

No. California Workers’ Compensation is a “no fault” system. Therefore, if the Social Worker made a mistake in knocking on the wrong door, it would not preclude her from having a valid claim.

Are There Two Types of Cases Here? Why?

In this fact pattern, there are two workers’ compensation claims. One is considered as the “live” claim and the other is a “death” claim. The “live” claim is one that considers the Social Worker’s disability prior to her death. During that period of time, it would appear that she was totally temporarily disabled. Thus, she would have been paid short term workers’ compensation benefits. These are referred to as TTD benefits. Further, it would appear that this Social Worker received substantial amounts of medical care while they were trying to keep her alive. This medical expense should also be considered as part of the “live” case.

Beyond the “live” case, there is also the “death” claim. The “death” claim serves two purposes. First, it is designed to compensate the Injured Worker’s dependents. The nature and extent of dependency, however, is something that is defined within workers’ compensation law. Also, time periods involved are of import. Also, the dependency payments are determined by various formulas. Also, the “death” claim includes the payment of burial expenses.

What If I Need Advice?

If you would like a free consultation regarding workers’ compensation, please contact the Law Offices of Edward J. Singer, a Professional Law Corporation. We have been helping people in Central and Southern California deal with their workers’ compensation cases for 27 years. Contact us today for more information.

STORE CLERK KILLED OVER UNACCEPTABLE CASH PAYMENT: INJURED WORKERS IN THE NEWS, #106

Posted on December 14, 2023 by Edward Singer

As reported on kansascity.com, a 21-year-old Store Clerk was fatally shot by a Customer. The murder of the clerk was the result of a currency dispute; the Customer tried to make a cigar purchase with money that was in bad shape. The Clerk refused the payment. According to the account, “the Customer pulled out a gun and demanded the cigar…[and]… The Clerk gave the Customer the cigar and asked him to leave.” The Customer proceeded to fire two shots at the Clerk.

This case will be analyzed under California Law. The reporting on this matter did not speak of any spouse, children or dependents. Thus, this article will discuss what occurs when there is a work-related death without any dependents.

What Happens When There is An Industrial Death When There Are No Beneficiaries?

California Workers’ Compensation Law has a provision that allows for the State of California to receive benefits when an Injured Worker dies without a beneficiary. Labor Code Section 4706.5 provides “(a) [w]henever any fatal injury is suffered by an employee under circumstances that would entitle the employee to compensation benefits, but for his or her death, and the employee does not leave surviving any person entitled to a dependency death benefit, the

employer shall pay a sum to the Department of Industrial Relations equal to the total dependency death benefit that would be payable to a surviving spouse with no dependent minor children.”

In these circumstances, Insurance Carriers will generally conduct an investigation to locate any possible dependents. If there is none, they will be obligated to make payment to the state.

Fentanyl and Methamphetamine Overdose Claims Life of Washington Police Officer: Injured Workers in the News, #98

Posted on October 30, 2023 by Edward Singer

While working, a Police Officer- while at his precinct- collapsed and died from fentanyl and meth poisoning. In the news reports, it is reported that the incident may not have been by accident. According to the Dailymail, “Police in Vancouver, Washington, investigated Kelly’s death and concluded that it was ‘more likely than not caused by an intentional act and not an incidental workplace exposure,’”

This article will discuss the issue within the framework of California Workers’ Compensation Law with respect to this workplace death and whether it was work-related.

If Someone Dies At the Workplace, Is It Automatically Considered As A Work-Related Death?

No. Injuries in the workplace must be AOE/COE- arising out of employment and in the course and scope of employment. While a death may occur during the course and scope of employment, i.e. while at the place of employment, there may be uncertainty as to whether it was caused by work. In this instance, illicit drug use has been implicated as to the cause of death.

What Is The Standard For Proving a Death Is Work-Related?

The Cailfornia Supreme Court in South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2015) 61 Cal.4th 291 [188 Cal.Rptr.3d 46, 349 P.3d 141], noted that “[w]e have recognized the contributing cause standard …Under this test, if the injury can be seen to have followed as a natural incident of the work and to have been contemplated by a reasonable person familiar with the whole situation as a result of the exposure occasioned by the nature of the employment, then it arises “out of” the employment. But it excludes an injury which cannot fairly be traced to the employment as a contributing proximate cause and which comes from a hazard to which the workman would be equally exposed apart from the employment.’””

In the instant matter, it is possible that an industrial contributing cause could be found. It is possible that, as a law enforcement officer, there may be presumptions that could apply and assist in proving an industrial injury. Thus, this fact pattern is worthy of exploring whether there was a valid industrial death claim. Thus, despite the allegation of illicit drug use and a statement from the department concerning it, there still may be a way of proving it as work-related. For instance, the officer may have been suffering from an industrial orthopedic injury and decided to self-medicate by using an illegal drug.

What If I Need Legal Advice?

Tragic Fate: Italian Cheesemaker Perishes in Cheese Wheel Avalanche: Injured Workers in the News, #96

Posted on October 25, 2023 by Edward Singer

A workplace tragedy raises an interesting workers’ compensation hypothetical question. It was reported that a Farmer was crushed to death by an avalanche of Parmesan Style Cheese Wheels. From the news account, it appeared that the Farmer owned the business. This fact pattern raises the question as to whether a business owner can also be covered under workers’ compensation benefits. In addition to that issue, this article will analyze the industrial causation aspect to the accident.

Would This Accident Qualify As A Workers’ Compensation Injury?

As workers’ compensation is a “no fault” system, the accident described, either accidental or unexplainable, would be considered as work-related. Workers’ Compensation Law does not require that the exact cause of injury be determined. Rather, the accident is viewed under a prism of reasonable probability. As it was most likely accidental in nature, the incident would be considered work-related. As the death was caused by the avalanche of cheese, the death would be considered as industrial.

Can An Employer Or Owner Of A Company Be Considered As An Employee Eligible For Workers’ Compensation Benefits?

In California, it is possible for employers to participate in their workers’ compensation claims’ policy. In order to do so, the employer should contact the carrier and make arrangements. For example, a corporation owner may take salary at the company. As such, the owner is technically an employee. If the owner chooses to do so, they would be required to pay for the insurance premium based upon their salary. Likewise, if no arrangement is made, the employer is likely to be viewed as a non-employee and not eligible for benefits.

What Death Benefits Would Be Available?

If the death was covered under workers’ compensation, the Farmer’s dependents would be entitled to death benefits. Further, burial expenses are available up to $10,000.00.

What If I Need Legal Advice?

83-Year-Old Home Depot Employee Death: Injured Workers in the News #72

Posted on December 6, 2022 by Edward Singer

An 83-year-old Home Depot Worker died six weeks after sustaining a work injury. He had been shoved to the ground by a serial shoplifter while apparently trying to stop a theft. The Home Depot Worker sustained injuries as a result of the shove and he lived for 5 weeks before passing. The medical examiner has ruled the death to be a homicide. Dailymail.com

This article will discuss how the Injured Worker’s death was work-related for the purposes of obtaining death benefits.

Does A Time Delay Between The Work Injury and The Death Matter for the Purposes of Pursuing a Death Claim?

Yes and No. California Workers’ Compensation Law provides for 240 weeks from the date of the injury to the date of death for the period of the delay. Deaths happening beyond this period are likely barred by the statute of limitations. Thus, a five week delay in the passing would be within the statute of limitation. The claim would be timely and dependency death benefits are warranted.

Does the Medical Examiner’s Opinion of Homicide Determine Industrial Causation?

No. The Medical Examiner’s opinion that the death was a homicide is a medical determination within the area of criminal law. In California, workers’ compensation and criminal law have different burdens of proof. California Workers’ Compensation Law has a reasonable medical probability standard. Likewise, the work injury’s relation to the death has a specific standard as well. The South Coast Framing case standard that applies: It is well established that for the purpose of meeting the causation requirement in a workers’ compensation injury claim, it is sufficient if the work is a contributing cause of the injury. (South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2015) 61 Cal. 4th 291, [188 Cal. Rptr. 3d 46, 349 P.3d 141, 80 Cal. Comp. Cases 489].) “

Thus,Workers’ Compensation medical examiners will have to express an opinion whether, within reasonable medical probability, that the work injury was a contributing factor in the Injured Worker’s death. Arguably, the Medical Examiner’s opinion, which most likely is criminal law based, expresses that it a higher standard than workers’ compensation law requires.

While one could argue that the Medical Examiner’s opinion should be binding, there argument is arguing apples and oranges. Even with such an opinion, it is likely that a carrier would also seek an opinion within the workers’ compensation system. This could be a QME, a Treating Doctor or an Agreed Medical Examiner on the issue.

What if I Need Advice?