Published on: |

Disputes over workers’ compensation benefits often extend beyond questions of injury and into the calculation and administration of payments, particularly when employees believe insurers have undervalued their claims. While injured workers may seek to challenge such practices through broader consumer protection laws, courts must determine whether those claims fall within the exclusive framework of workers’ compensation statutes. A recent Massachusetts decision addressed whether employees can pursue claims for unfair or deceptive practices against insurers in court, or whether such disputes must remain within the workers’ compensation system. If you are facing issues related to benefit calculations or claim handling, you should consider consulting a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to understand the proper avenues for relief.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiffs were employees who sustained injuries while working on a large-scale construction project and subsequently received workers’ compensation benefits through the defendant insurer. The plaintiffs contended that the benefits they received were improperly calculated because certain fringe benefits were excluded from the determination of their average weekly wages.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs believed the defendant insurer engaged in unfair and deceptive practices by misrepresenting the amount of benefits owed, failing to include additional compensation components, and delaying proper payment. The plaintiffs further claimed that these actions forced them to pursue additional proceedings to obtain the benefits they believed were due. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Work-related injuries and chronic medical conditions often give rise to complex disputes over eligibility for disability benefits, particularly when medical evidence appears mixed or evolving. Courts are frequently asked to determine whether administrative decisions denying benefits properly account for competing medical opinions and the claimant’s subjective complaints. A recent Massachusetts decision examined these issues in the context of a denial of disability insurance benefits, offering important guidance on how administrative law judges evaluate medical opinion evidence and assess consistency within the record. If you are navigating a similar dispute, you should consider speaking with a Massachusetts Social Security disability attorney to better understand how these standards may affect your claims.

Factual and Procedural Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed an application for disability insurance benefits, asserting that he became unable to work due to physical injuries and related conditions stemming from a workplace incident. The claim was initially denied and, upon reconsideration, again denied, prompting the plaintiff to request a hearing before an administrative law judge.

It is alleged that the administrative law judge conducted a hearing during which the plaintiff testified regarding ongoing pain, physical limitations, and associated symptoms. A vocational expert also testified concerning the types of work that might be available given the plaintiff’s limitations. Following the hearing, the administrative law judge issued an unfavorable decision, concluding that the plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Disputes over workers’ compensation benefits often extend beyond questions of injury and into the calculation and administration of payments, particularly when employees believe insurers have undervalued their claims. While injured workers may seek to challenge such practices through broader consumer protection laws, courts must determine whether those claims fall within the exclusive framework of workers’ compensation statutes. A recent Massachusetts decision addressed whether employees can pursue claims for unfair or deceptive practices against insurers in court, or whether such disputes must remain within the workers’ compensation system. If you are facing issues related to benefit calculations or claim handling, you should consider consulting a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to understand the proper avenues for relief.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiffs were employees who sustained injuries while working on a large-scale construction project and subsequently received workers’ compensation benefits through the defendant insurer. The plaintiffs contended that the benefits they received were improperly calculated because certain fringe benefits were excluded from the determination of their average weekly wages.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs believed the defendant insurer engaged in unfair and deceptive practices by misrepresenting the amount of benefits owed, failing to include additional compensation components, and delaying proper payment. The plaintiffs further claimed that these actions forced them to pursue additional proceedings to obtain the benefits they believed were due. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workers’ compensation claims involving psychological injuries and workplace stress often present difficult questions about causation, employer responsibility, and the scope of available remedies. When a workplace incident leads to serious mental health consequences or even death, claimants may pursue benefits while also considering related employment claims. However, findings made in a workers’ compensation proceeding can have far-reaching consequences, potentially limiting or even barring subsequent legal actions. A recent Massachusetts decision addressed how prior workers’ compensation rulings can preclude later disability discrimination claims arising from the same underlying events. If you are dealing with complex workplace injury or mental health claims, you should consider consulting with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to better understand how these legal principles may impact your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the decedent was employed by the defendant as a supervisor and experienced increasing workplace responsibilities over time. After suffering from severe depression and related mental health conditions, the decedent was hospitalized and later returned to work with an understanding that his hours would be limited.

It is alleged that the decedent resumed his employment and continued working under the modified schedule for an extended period. On a later date, the decedent was temporarily reassigned within the workplace. Shortly thereafter, the decedent died by suicide while on the employer’s premises. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workers’ compensation claims often hinge on whether an injury or disability is truly related to employment. When medical causation is disputed, courts must evaluate competing expert opinions and apply statutory presumptions carefully. A recent Massachusetts ruling illustrates how these principles operate under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, particularly when an employer presents evidence rebutting the presumption of work-related injury. If you are pursuing a workers’ compensation claim involving disputed medical causation, you should consult with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to discuss how to protect your interests.

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the decedent suffered a workplace injury to his leg while operating machinery and later developed a serious bone infection that ultimately led to amputation.

It is reported that the decedent had a preexisting medical condition that caused an ulcer on his toe, which was not related to his employment. Medical providers later identified a bacterial infection present in that ulcer. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workplace injury claims often raise complex questions about who qualifies as an “employer” under the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act. While injured employees may pursue third-party negligence claims, those claims are barred when the defendant is deemed part of the same employing entity. A recent Massachusetts Appeals Court decision examines how closely related corporate entities may be treated as a single employer under a joint enterprise theory, significantly affecting an injured worker’s ability to pursue civil claims. If you were injured on the job and are unsure whether you may pursue claims beyond workers’ compensation, you should consult with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to evaluate your rights.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff was injured while working as a prep cook at a restaurant and subsequently received workers’ compensation benefits under an insurance policy that covered multiple related business entities.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a negligence action against two affiliated corporate entities, asserting that they were separate third parties responsible for his injuries. The defendants denied liability and argued that the claims were barred under the Workers’ Compensation Act because the entities functioned as a single employer. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workplace injuries and fatalities can raise difficult legal questions about liability, especially when claims extend beyond the direct employer to corporate leadership. A recent decision from a Massachusetts court addressed the interpretation of statutory provisions governing workers’ compensation exclusivity doctrine and limits attempts to impose liability on individuals acting in an employer capacity. If you have lost a loved one in a workplace incident or have questions about wrongful death and workers’ compensation claims, you should consult with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to understand your legal options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the decedent was employed as a residential treatment counselor at a mental health facility operated by a charitable organization when she was fatally assaulted by a resident with a known history of violence.

It is reported that the decedent’s estate filed a wrongful death action against the organization’s directors, as well as other defendants, asserting that the directors implemented or failed to implement policies that inadequately screened residents and failed to ensure workplace safety. The complaint further alleged that the directors’ decisions exposed employees to foreseeable harm and constituted gross negligence. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Massachusetts workers who obtain compensation for permanent injuries often rely on those awards as a critical source of financial stability. A recent opinion from a Massachusetts court clarifies whether insurers may reduce those awards to recover attorney’s fees, a question that directly impacts the amount injured employees ultimately receive. The dispute centered on the interpretation of statutory provisions governing workers’ compensation, and the court’s ruling reinforces important protections for injured workers. If you have questions about how workers’ compensation benefits may be calculated or reduced, you should speak with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to understand your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the employee sustained injuries to his knee, shoulder, and head after slipping and falling during the course of his employment, after which he began receiving benefits for total incapacity under Massachusetts workers’ compensation law.

It is reported that the employee later filed claims seeking additional medical benefits and compensation for specific permanent injuries. An administrative judge initially denied the claim for specific compensation, prompting the employee to appeal and proceed toward a formal hearing. Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workers’ compensation systems rely on statutory frameworks that allocate responsibility among employers, insurers, and state-administered funds. Disputes often arise when insurers or reinsurers seek reimbursement for benefits paid, particularly in complex situations involving insolvency or layered coverage. A recent Massachusetts decision clarified the scope of reimbursement rights under the Workers’ Compensation Act, emphasizing that courts will adhere closely to statutory language and resist expanding exclusions beyond those expressly provided by the Legislature. If you are dealing with workers’ compensation coverage issues or reimbursement disputes, you should consider speaking with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to protect your interests.

History of the Case

Allegedly, an employee sustained a workplace injury while employed by a self-insured employer that had secured both a bond and reinsurance coverage to satisfy its workers’ compensation obligations. Over time, the employee became permanently disabled and began receiving ongoing benefits, including cost-of-living adjustments. 

It is alleged that after the employer’s losses exceeded a contractual threshold, the reinsurer began reimbursing the employer for certain base benefits. At the same time, another entity paid additional benefits following the employer’s bankruptcy. Eventually, the reinsurer was required to pay both base and cost-of-living benefits directly to the injured employee after administrative proceedings determined its obligations under the governing statute. 

Continue reading →

Published on: |

Workplace disputes involving alleged injuries, emotional harm, and adverse employment actions often implicate the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act, particularly its exclusivity provisions. Employees may attempt to pursue civil claims for emotional distress or related harms, but courts must determine whether those claims fall within the scope of workers’ compensation, thereby barring separate lawsuits. A recent Massachusetts decision highlights how these principles operate, emphasizing that even when a workers’ compensation claim is denied, the statutory framework may still preclude certain tort claims. If you have experienced workplace injury or retaliation, you should consider speaking with a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to evaluate your legal options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff was employed by a municipal entity for decades and later claimed that she was subjected to a hostile work environment, retaliation, and discriminatory treatment by her supervisor and other officials. She asserted that workplace conditions deteriorated after she raised concerns about health hazards and management practices.

It is alleged that the plaintiff experienced significant workplace stress and sought medical leave, including leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, due to the impact of her working conditions on her health. She further claimed that her supervisor reduced her responsibilities, disclosed private medical information, and pressured her toward resignation. 

Contact Information
128 Dean St
Taunton, MA 02780
Phone: 508-822-6600Fax: 508-822-8006

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Law Office of James K. Meehan
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design