Where We Started: Workers' Comp Practice Pre-Pandemic
Before March 16, 2020, the day of a Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorney was quite hectic, driving around the state, attending court hearings, depositions, mediations and client meetings. Depending on where your office was located, and the counties your cases were located, the time in the car could be extensive. Many firms opened multiple offices to reduce travel time. Many clients thought travel time was irrelevant, if they wanted their favorite attorneys covering a specific matter. Focusing on the court system, most cases would involve attending a series of hearings, from a pretrial hearing to a final hearing, with the number of hearings per case being different depending on the judge. In some of Pennsylvania's larger cities, court hearings would typically be a "call of the list," where multiple cases were scheduled at the same time, and attorneys would appear at the hearing room and wait for their case to be called, sometimes dashing back and forth between multiple courtrooms. You could be at the hearing office anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours or all day even, depending on whether you had a pre-trial hearing at the beginning of the list, or testimony of a witness at the end of the list. Many judges held their hearings in the morning, leaving the attorneys' schedules open in the afternoon for depositions, mediations and client meetings, all of which took place in person. Some days and for the better part of some weeks, workers' compensation attorneys did not even make it to the office.Hybrid Workers' Comp Practice in Pennsylvania for 2023 and Onward
The COVID-19 pandemic presented major challenges for many areas of the practice of law, but the workers' compensation, on the whole, has thrived, delivering a successful experience at a lower cost with lower overhead to all stakeholders.
November 03, 2022 at 11:57 AM
7 minute read
Commentary|
Where We Started: Workers' Comp Practice Pre-Pandemic
Before March 16, 2020, the day of a Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorney was quite hectic, driving around the state, attending court hearings, depositions, mediations and client meetings. Depending on where your office was located, and the counties your cases were located, the time in the car could be extensive. Many firms opened multiple offices to reduce travel time. Many clients thought travel time was irrelevant, if they wanted their favorite attorneys covering a specific matter. Focusing on the court system, most cases would involve attending a series of hearings, from a pretrial hearing to a final hearing, with the number of hearings per case being different depending on the judge. In some of Pennsylvania's larger cities, court hearings would typically be a "call of the list," where multiple cases were scheduled at the same time, and attorneys would appear at the hearing room and wait for their case to be called, sometimes dashing back and forth between multiple courtrooms. You could be at the hearing office anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours or all day even, depending on whether you had a pre-trial hearing at the beginning of the list, or testimony of a witness at the end of the list. Many judges held their hearings in the morning, leaving the attorneys' schedules open in the afternoon for depositions, mediations and client meetings, all of which took place in person. Some days and for the better part of some weeks, workers' compensation attorneys did not even make it to the office.
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 AllWhile Data Breaches May Lead to Years of Legal Battles, Cyberattacks Can Be Prevented
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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