Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2011 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wood v. Caudle-Hyatt, Inc.green2 sentences2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C 2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C | 6 | 6 |
Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Van Hoygreen2 sentences2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C 2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C | 2 | 2 |
Stone v. George W. Helme Co.green2 sentences2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C 2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C | 1 | 1 |
Noblin v. Randolph Corp.green2 sentences2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C 2011Just as in the case of a single, “unitary” accident, this principle assures the claimant will receive compensation for his injury but will not receive a double recovery. “[T]o protect the employer who may be required to provide ... workers’ compensation- benefits [to the employee injured due to third-party negligence], [the Supreme Court has held that] the employee may not pursue his common law remedy [in the third-party matter] in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer’s subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive worker’s compensation benefits.” Wood v. C | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.