Wine-Settergren v. Lamey

How courts have described this case

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

• observing the remedies provided in the Act are in derogation of common law and must be strictly construed against limitations on a claimant’s right to bring suit
• providing the “nexus is established when a reasonably prudent person considers the injury to be born out of a risk incidental to the employment, or when the facts indicate a connection between the injury and the circumstances under which the employment occurs”
• spouse may not bring loss of consortium claim where injured spouse's claim is barred by Worker's Compensation Statute
• spouse may not bring loss of consortium claim where injured spouse's claim is barred by Worker's Compensation Statute
• “The accidental injury occurred during the parties’ regular working hours and in a vending machine room on the employer’s premises where Lamey could reasonably be expected to be . . . [t]herefore, the injury occurred in the course of his employment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).