Legal Opinion
Georgetown University v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 21, 2003No. 01-AA-877PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BELSON, Senior Judge:
This is not a typical workers’ compensation case. In a reversal of usual roles, the petitioning employer seeks a holding that its employee’s injury was compensable, while the employee asks that we uphold the decision that she was not entitled to compensation.
This role reversal is due to the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act. 1 The employee would prefer to go forward with her pending Superior Court tort suit against the employer, while the employer prefers to pay compensation, and have its employee’s tort action dismissed.
I
Petitioner Georgetown…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BomarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Ferreira v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Harrington v. MossDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Clark v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Lockhart v. Coastal International Security, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- McCamey v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Georgetown University v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Bentt v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Vanzant v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.