Violation of Law or Commission of Crime

As a general rule, an employee is not necessarily withdrawn from workers' compensation eligibility if he is injured while violating a law or committing a crime in furtherance of his job duties. Most often, the violation of a law or commission of a crime will affect an employee's receipt of benefits if, in the applicable state, it constitutes "wilful misconduct" or is the subject of its very own statutory provision giving a defense to the employer. The violation of a statute does not ipso facto equal "wilful misconduct." Rather, flagrancy and knowledge on the part of the employee are generally required for an act to rise to the level of "wilful."

Injury by Exposure and "Arising Out of the Employment"

Workers' compensation for injuries resulting from exposure to the elements is not forestalled merely because a natural event was at the root of the injuries. Exposure injuries, such as heatstroke, freezing, frostbite, and pneumonia, may be compensable if the nature of the employee's work increased the level of exposure over that of other members of the public. Some jurisdictions allow compensation if the risk of exposure to the employee was caused by his employment. In other words, regardless of whether the general public would or would not suffer the same exposure, it was the employee's work that precipitated or caused the exposure.

Disability Under the "Odd-Lot" Doctrine

The "odd-lot" doctrine is an avenue by which a worker may be found to be totally disabled based on unemployability rather than just the degree to which he is injured. It provides that, although a worker is not completely unable to work, his condition is such that he will not be regularly employed in any reasonably stable area of the labor market. The hallmark of placement in the "odd-lot" category is a job prospect that is irregular and unpredictable.

Consultative Examinations, Generally

Consultative examinations (CE) of a social security claimant are used by the Social Security Administration (SSA) when the claimant's medical evidence is insufficient to determine the claimant's disability, or lack thereof. Although the claimant's treating physician is the preferred source of medical evidence, there are instances where a medical examination from an independent source is necessary. These include situations where the treating physician is unwilling to perform the examination, there are inconsistencies in the claimant's file that cannot be resolved by consulting with the treating physician, the claimant himself prefers an examination by a source other than his treating physician with good reason, or prior experience in dealing with the treating physician indicates that he may be unable to effectively provide the necessary service.

Workers' Compensation Exemption re Number of Employees

In some states, an employer is exempt from maintaining workers' compensation insurance if it regularly employs only a certain number of employees. For example, with certain exceptions, employers in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Virginia, New Mexico, and North Carolina are exempt if they have less than three employees. Employers in Rhode Island and South Carolina are exempt if employing less than four employees while employers in Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee are exempt if employing less than five employees. If the employee is injured and the state has altered its exemption statute, the operative version of the statute on the date of the employee's injury will control.