Rules surrounding Arizona workers’ compensation often complex
The laws surrounding workers who were injured on the job, in Arizona or elsewhere, are often complex, full of stipulations and exceptions. A recent workers’ compensation case in another state proved no different. Workers’ compensation is an insurance that was implemented to help protect injured employees, but with so many complicated rules and so many possibilities, the representation of a lawyer frequently proves critical.
The recent case ended with both a workers’ compensation settlement and a civil suit settlement. It involved a woman who suffered a traumatic brain injury after driving from work late at night and getting into a severe car accident. She was returning home after working on a special audit at 2:30 in the morning when she veered off the road and collided with a tree.
Though the combined amounts of both settlements – a record-breaking $10 million – may sound high, the woman will most assuredly need the money to help pay her medical costs and care. Traumatic brain injuries often require ongoing rehabilitation and treatment in long-term care facilities, and at times, permanent additional assistance is necessary. Depending upon the extent of the injury, many sufferers never fully recover and are unable to ever return to work or regain their full cognitive function.
Normally, driving to and from work is not covered by workers’ compensation. That stipulation has many exceptions, however, as demonstrated in this instance. Because the woman was driving home outside of regular commute hours due to the special circumstances required by a work assignment, her situation was able to be filed under workers’ compensation. With such complex rules governing workers’ compensation, and just as many exceptions to every rule, Arizona workers who have been injured on the job often find it beneficial to seek the guidance of an attorney with experience in workers’ compensation claims.
Source: norcalrecord.com, “Record-breaking settlement approved in California workers’ compensation case“, S. Laney Griffo, April 4, 2017