Law Firm Softball Game Injury Not Work-Related, Judge Rules
Morris James does not have to pay a paralegal's workers' compensation claims for an injury he suffered while rounding the bases during a softball game played by firm employees, a Delaware Superior Court judge has ruled.
April 03, 2018 at 05:04 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
Morris James does not have to pay a paralegal's workers' compensation claims for an injury he suffered while rounding the bases during a softball game played by firm employees, a Delaware Superior Court judge has ruled.
After nearly three years of litigation, Judge Ferris W. Wharton said last week that William Weller, a paralegal for Morris James' bankruptcy practice, was not entitled to the benefits because he had ruptured his Achilles tendon outside the scope of his employment with one of Delaware's best-known law firms.
The ruling reversed an earlier finding by the state Industrial Accident Board that participation on the team was an employment-related activity that benefited the firm by boosting employee productivity. Wharton, however, said that the board's decision “misconstrues” settled law and essentially “makes up” a new factor for deciding whether employers are required to pay the benefits.
In a 23-page opinion, Wharton said that Morris James derived no direct benefit from Weller's involvement with the team, which plays in the Wilmington Lawyers League.
“Such enhanced productivity is a consequence of the increased morale, c[a]maraderie and health of the employees resulting from participating on the softball team and is the very type of benefit this court admonished the board to disregard,” Wharton wrote March 29.
“Morris James is a law firm; its goal is to bring in legal business. Morris James does not advertise its legal services at games, its clientele does not attend or participate at games, and softball has no beneficial monetary impact on the firm.”
Weller, who has been with the firm since 2002, convinced the board last year that Morris James brought softball into the orbit of employment at the firm by paying for equipment and signing liability agreements so the team could practice in the area. He had also pointed to testimony from other employees at the firm who said they felt pressured to play in the games.
The board found in its ruling that the involvement of several of the Morris James' vendors could have resulted in cost savings on services provided to the firm.
But Wharton said that employee participation was voluntary, and there was no evidence that playing on the team was a job requirement. Wharton also blasted as “entirely conjecture” the board's conclusion that vendor involvement had resulted in a direct benefit for the firm.
“Conjecture is not evidence,” Wharton wrote. “[The board] does not provide even a mere scintilla of evidence to support the conclusion, nor would a reasonable mind accept it as adequate.”
Weller did not respond to a call requesting comment on the case, and Morris James did not provide comment for this story.
Attorneys for Weller and the firm were not immediately available to comment on Tuesday.
Weller was represented by Gary S. Nitsche and William R. Stewart of Weik, Nitsche & Dougherty.
Morris James was represented by Scott R. Mondell and Elissa A. Greenberg of Elzufon Austin & Mondell.
The case, on appeal to the Superior Court, was captioned Morris James v. Weller.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatham, Finnegan Win $115M Muscular Dystrophy Drug Patent Verdict for Counterclaimant
2 minute readDelaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute read3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250