(a) No compensation for work-related injuries resulting in physical impairment shall be paid prior to an inmate's release.
(b) Compensation may only be paid for work-related injuries or claims alleging improper medical treatment of a work-related injury. This ordinarily includes only those injuries suffered during the performance of an inmate's regular work assignment. However, injuries suffered during the performance of voluntary work in the operation or maintenance of the institution, when such work has been approved by staff, may also be compensable.
(c) Compensation is not paid for injuries sustained during participation in institutional programs (such as programs of a social, recreational, or community relations nature) or from maintenance of one's own living quarters. Furthermore, compensation shall not be paid for injuries suffered away from the work location (e.g., while the claimant is going to or leaving work, or going to or coming from lunch outside of the work station or area).
(d) Injuries sustained by inmate workers willfully or with intent to injure someone else, or injuries suffered in any activity not related to the actual performance of the work assignment are not compensable, and no claim for compensation for such injuries will be approved. Willful violation of rules and regulations may result in denial of compensation for any resulting injury.
Notes of Decisions
Alvarez v. Ashcroft (2005)
ca10
“28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (b) (2005) (noting that the statute applies to inmates receiving “improper medical treatment of a work-related injury”).”
William Baynes v. United States (2008)
ca6 · cites it 6×
“” 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (c). The plaintiffs contend that they suffered non-work-related injuries on the bus ride because they had yet to arrive at the work area—FCI Ashland’s garage.”
Loren Bagola v. Thomas Kindt (1997)
ca7
“” 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (d). In Bagola's case, the ap-pellees argue that Bagóla was violating factory procedure by working inside the gates while the Whitten machines were running, and they point to the fact that he was cited for a safety violation following the accident.”
Keith Mays v. United States (2014)
ca3
“The relevant regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (c), states that “compensation shall not be paid for injuries suffered away from the work location (e.”
MARTINEZ v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (2023)
njd · cites it 4×
“Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s renewed motion to dismiss Plaintiff submits Defendant failed to establish that Plaintiff was performing his regular work assignment or voluntary work approved by staff, as defined in 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 , when he was injured stripping floors…”
Rodriguez v. United States (2024)
pamd · cites it 4×
“It observed that the coverage available under the IACA “compare[d] favorably with compensation laws all over the country,” and that “compensation laws are practically always thought of as substitutes for, not supplements to, common-law tort actions.”
MARTINEZ v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (2022)
njd · cites it 2×
“May 30, 2018) (citing 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (b)). (Id.) C. Plaintiff's Opposition Brief In opposition to dismissal of the complaint, Plaintiff seeks discovery of documents from Defendant to establish that he was not performing a voluntary work assignment at the time of the injury.”
Rhodes v. United States (2020)
ilsd
“Finally, Rhodes insists that the Court erred in concluding that his claim fell within the scope of the IACA because his injury “was not suffered during the performance of [his] regular work assignment,” 28 C.F.R. § 301.301 (b), and was suffered “away from the work location,” 28…”
— 28 C.F.R. § 301.301(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.