Gilbert v. USF Holland, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating employer could reasonably argue later inconsistent version of incident was a fabrication
• stating employer could reasonably argue later inconsistent version of incident was a fabrication
• “[W]hen an employee’s claim for benefits is fairly debatable based on a good faith dispute over the employee’s factual or legal entitlement to benefits, an award of penalty benefits is not appropriate under the statute.”
• “In conclusion, we hold as a matter of law there was a reasonable factual dispute as to the manner in which Gilbert’s injury occurred. Therefore, there is not substantial evidence in the record to support a finding that the compensability of his injury was not fairly debatable.”
• “In conclusion, we hold as a matter of law there was a reasonable factual dispute as to the manner in which Gilbert's injury occurred. Therefore, there is not substantial evidence in the record to support a finding that the compensability of his injury was not fairly debatable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).