
Robert E. Levy
Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Robert E. Levy
Date: January 24, 2014
Partner
201-896-7163 rlevy@sh-law.comUnder the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act, participating New Jersey employers are obligated to provide compensation to employees who are injured in accidents arising out of and in the course of employment, regardless of whether either party was negligent. Determining whether a given accident falls under the statute is often the subject of New Jersey litigation.
In Burdette v. Harrah’s Atlantic City, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court recently clarified the time-and-place nexus that must exist between the injured worker’s employment and the accident.
The Facts of the Case
Plaintiff Carla Burdette was injured in an automobile accident after completing her shift as a casino dealer at Harrah’s Atlantic City. At the point of impact, Burdette’s vehicle was located partially on MGM Mirage Boulevard, but was still partly over Harrah’s driveway’s apron. Harrah’s denied the claim, arguing that Burdette had exited the premises when the crash occurred. However, the trial court concluded that because one foot in length of Burdette’s car was still in the area of the parking lot controlled by Harrah’s, she was still in the course of her employment when the accident occurred.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division ultimately upheld the trial court’s decision, rejecting Harrah’s argument that the trial court erroneously based its decision on “disposition of the vehicle rather than the place where the Petitioner-Respondent’s accidental injuries occurred.”
As noted by the court, the Workers’ Compensation Act specifically states that “[e]mployment shall be deemed to commence when an employee arrives at the employer’s place of employment to report for work and shall terminate when the employee leaves the employer’s place of employment, excluding areas not under the control of the employer.”
In reaching its decision, the court further highlighted that the so-called premises rule should be read expansively. “Because the Act is humanitarian social legislation, it is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage, for the protection of employees,” they said. “The inextricable connection between Harrah’s premises and the collision would render a parting of the accidental injuries from compensability an unjust result.”
The court further rejected Harrah’s “ultra-rigid approach that focuses only on the colliding vehicles’ point of impact and the front seat location of Burdette in her Explorer. Instead, applying common sense and the policies inherent in the Act, we subscribe to the judge of compensation’s viewpoint that the injuries suffered here were a result of Burdette’s firm attachment to her place of employment, albeit while on her way home.”
The Message for Employers
As this New Jersey workers’ compensation case highlights, employers may be held liable for accidents that occur on the outskirts of their properties. Moreover, given the legislative intent to quickly provide compensation to injury victims, courts will tend to rule in favor coverage.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss New Jersey’s Workers’ Compensation Act, please contact me, Robert Levy, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck employment attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Under the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act, participating New Jersey employers are obligated to provide compensation to employees who are injured in accidents arising out of and in the course of employment, regardless of whether either party was negligent. Determining whether a given accident falls under the statute is often the subject of New Jersey litigation.
In Burdette v. Harrah’s Atlantic City, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court recently clarified the time-and-place nexus that must exist between the injured worker’s employment and the accident.
The Facts of the Case
Plaintiff Carla Burdette was injured in an automobile accident after completing her shift as a casino dealer at Harrah’s Atlantic City. At the point of impact, Burdette’s vehicle was located partially on MGM Mirage Boulevard, but was still partly over Harrah’s driveway’s apron. Harrah’s denied the claim, arguing that Burdette had exited the premises when the crash occurred. However, the trial court concluded that because one foot in length of Burdette’s car was still in the area of the parking lot controlled by Harrah’s, she was still in the course of her employment when the accident occurred.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division ultimately upheld the trial court’s decision, rejecting Harrah’s argument that the trial court erroneously based its decision on “disposition of the vehicle rather than the place where the Petitioner-Respondent’s accidental injuries occurred.”
As noted by the court, the Workers’ Compensation Act specifically states that “[e]mployment shall be deemed to commence when an employee arrives at the employer’s place of employment to report for work and shall terminate when the employee leaves the employer’s place of employment, excluding areas not under the control of the employer.”
In reaching its decision, the court further highlighted that the so-called premises rule should be read expansively. “Because the Act is humanitarian social legislation, it is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage, for the protection of employees,” they said. “The inextricable connection between Harrah’s premises and the collision would render a parting of the accidental injuries from compensability an unjust result.”
The court further rejected Harrah’s “ultra-rigid approach that focuses only on the colliding vehicles’ point of impact and the front seat location of Burdette in her Explorer. Instead, applying common sense and the policies inherent in the Act, we subscribe to the judge of compensation’s viewpoint that the injuries suffered here were a result of Burdette’s firm attachment to her place of employment, albeit while on her way home.”
The Message for Employers
As this New Jersey workers’ compensation case highlights, employers may be held liable for accidents that occur on the outskirts of their properties. Moreover, given the legislative intent to quickly provide compensation to injury victims, courts will tend to rule in favor coverage.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss New Jersey’s Workers’ Compensation Act, please contact me, Robert Levy, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck employment attorney with whom you work.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!