Handzel v. Kane-Miller Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• plaintiff argued that negligence action against employer for failure to provide adequate medical care to employee suffering heart attack was not barred by WCA
• plaintiff argued that negligence action against employer for failure to provide adequate medical care to employee suffering heart attack was not barred by WCA
• because \there is no duty at common law to provide aid to an injured person . . . [w]hatever duty [the defendants] owed the decedent must necessarily arise out of the employer- employee relationship\
• “If the employer and his agent owed the decedent a duty and were negligent, other than in a way that would amount to an intentional tort, then the exclusive remedy for employer negligence under the Workers’ Compensation Act bars the common law action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).