Zerofski's Case

How courts have described this case

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

• distinguishing between compensable injuries arising from a specific injury at work and “wear and tear” injuries
• standing and walking too common among human activities to constitute identifiable conditions of employment
• where work may be contributing cause of injury, but only to extent that many activities pursued in its place could have contributed, causation in fact is an inadequate test
• successive injury doctrine inapplicable to preexisting condition aggravated by standing and walking because these activities are “simply too common among necessary human activities to constitute identifiable conditions of employment.” Id. 433 N.E.2d at 872
• interpreting G. L. c. 152, § 26, workers’ compensation statute
• “ ‘[Pjurpose of [workers’ compensation] is to treat the cost of personal injuries incidental to . . . employment as a part of the cost of business.’ ... ‘It is not a scheme for health insurance’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).