A Capehart Scatchard Blog

John H. Geaney

John H. Geaney

John H. Geaney, an executive committee member and shareholder with Capehart Scatchard, began an email newsletter entitled Currents in Workers’ Compensation, ADA and FMLA in 2001 in order to keep clients and readers informed on leading developments in these three areas of law. Since that time he has written over 500 newsletter updates.

Mr. Geaney is the author of Geaney’s New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Manual for Practitioners, Adjusters & Employers. The manual is distributed by the New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education (NJICLE). He also authored an ADA and FMLA manual as distributed by NJICLE. If you are interested in purchasing the manual, please contact NJICLE at 732-214-8500 or visit their website at www.njicle.com.

Mr. Geaney represents employers in the defense of workers’ compensation, ADA and FMLA matters. He is a Fellow of the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers of the American Bar Association and is certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a workers’ compensation law attorney. He is one of two firm representatives to the National Workers’ Compensation Defense Network. He has served on the Executive Committee of Capehart Scatchard for over ten (10) years.

A graduate of Holy Cross College summa cum laude, Mr. Geaney obtained his law degree from Boston College Law School. He has been named a “Super Lawyer” by his peers and Law and Politics. He serves as Vice President of the Friends of MEND, the fundraising arm of a local charitable organization devoted to promoting affordable housing.

Capehart Scatchard is a full service law firm with offices in Mt. Laurel and Trenton, New Jersey. The firm represents employers and businesses in a wide variety of areas, including workers’ compensation, civil litigation, labor, environmental, business, estates and governmental affairs.

When Are Drives To Physicians Covered Under Workers’ Compensation?

By on October 20, 2017 in Benefits with 0 Comments
When Are Drives To Physicians Covered Under Workers’ Compensation?

It is not uncommon for injured workers to suffer additional injuries due to car accidents on the way to a physician’s office or physical therapist’s office. So what are the rules in New Jersey on compensability? Q. Is the injured worker covered for workers’ compensation purposes in a car accident on the way to treatment? […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Circuit Court of Appeals Rejects EEOC Position that a Long-Term Leave of Absence Can Constitute a Reasonable Accommodation under the ADA

By on October 13, 2017 in Court Rulings with 0 Comments

The EEOC has provided guidance that in its view a fairly long leave of absence should be considered a reasonable accommodation even after FMLA leave has been exhausted.  The Court in Severson v. Heartland Woodcraft, Inc., 33 AD Cases 1113, September 20, 2017 disagreed rather strongly with that view and did not follow EEOC advice. […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Appellate Division Reverses Award of 47.5% for Unoperated Low Back Condition

By on October 6, 2017 in Awards with 0 Comments
Appellate Division Reverses Award of 47.5% for Unoperated Low Back Condition

Rarely does the Appellate Division reverse a Judge of Compensation when the only issue is the extent of permanent partial disability.   The case of Van Artsdalen v. Fred M. Schiavone Construction, No. A-3392-15T1, 2017 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2516 (Oct. 5, 2017) is that rare example. The petitioner, Mr. Van Artsdalen, was injured on January […]

Share

Continue Reading »

The Underutilized and Underappreciated Defense of Lack of Timely Notice

By on September 29, 2017 in Key Defenses with 0 Comments
The Underutilized and Underappreciated Defense of Lack of Timely Notice

Some defenses, like the going-and-coming rule, get all the attention but there are other less well known defenses, like lack of timely notice, which can be very powerful as a defense in workers’ compensation.  One of the reasons that the notice defense is often ignored in New Jersey is its peculiar wording.  It has three […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Appellate Court Reverses Order for Temporary Disability Benefits Against One of Two Potential Employers Where Employment Was Disputed

By on September 22, 2017 in Court Rulings with 0 Comments
Appellate Court Reverses Order for Temporary Disability Benefits Against One of Two Potential Employers Where Employment Was Disputed

When a petitioner files a motion for medical and temporary disability benefits and the only issue is which carrier or employer is responsible, the Judge of Compensation can order benefits paid by one of the parties pending the outcome of litigation. The logic behind this rule is that it is unfair to delay benefits to […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Federal Court Allows Sheriff’s Deputies to Proceed to Jury Trial On Their Claim that County Ignored Their Requests for Light Duty Assignments While Recovering from Work Injuries

By on September 14, 2017 in Claims with 0 Comments
Federal Court Allows Sheriff’s Deputies to Proceed to Jury Trial On Their Claim that County Ignored Their Requests for Light Duty Assignments While Recovering from Work Injuries

Light duty was the issue in Smith v. DuPage Cnty. Sheriff, 33 AD Cases 789 (N.D. Ill. June 5, 2017).  Four Sheriff’s Deputies suffered work injuries in 2013 and 2014 and received full salary for one year while on leave from their injuries.  After the one-year period, the officers received the statutory amount for temporary […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Township Prevails in Dismissing Occupational Psychiatric Claim of Former Police Officer

By on September 7, 2017 in Claims with 0 Comments
Township Prevails in Dismissing Occupational Psychiatric Claim of Former Police Officer

Occupational psychiatric claims, like all occupational claims, must be filed within time or be subject to the statute of limitations defense.  The challenge is always whether the employer can prove that the employee knew the nature of his condition and its relationship to work.  That was the issue in Bender v. Township of North Bergen, […]

Share

Continue Reading »

New York Staffing Company’s Carrier Must Pay Workers’ Comp for Injury In New Jersey Even Though the Policy Specified Solely New York Locations

By on August 31, 2017 in Key Defenses with 0 Comments
New York Staffing Company’s Carrier Must Pay Workers’ Comp for Injury In New Jersey Even Though the Policy Specified Solely New York Locations

Cases involving temporary staffing agencies and professional employer organizations often lead to unusual and complex legal issues in workers’ compensation.  The recent case of Detres v. Workforce Logistics Corp., A-4963-15T1 (App. Div. August 25, 2017) illustrates this point quite well by delving deeply into coverage and conflicts of law issues in a very high exposure […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Court Rejects Argument that Level I and II Trauma Centers Deserve Special Fee Schedules in Comp

By on August 24, 2017 in Claims with 0 Comments

In University Physicians Associates v. Transport Drivers, Inc., A-3350-15T2 (App. Div. August 22, 2017), the Appellate Division considered an argument that Level I and II Trauma Centers should be given different treatment when it comes to billing along the lines that they receive under the fee schedule for No-Fault automobile policies. The case stemmed from […]

Share

Continue Reading »

How Employers Can Win Trials On Reopeners

By on August 22, 2017 in Awards with 0 Comments
How Employers Can Win Trials On Reopeners

Last week I wrote about how employers should not handle reopener claims, namely trying them on reports without expert testimony.  The case of Kalucki v. United Parcel Service, A-3486-15T3 (App. Div. August 15, 2017) demonstrates the winning strategy for employers to adopt in reopener claims. The case involved an injury that took place many years […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Respondent’s Decision Not To Produce Live Testimony Costs Dearly On Reopener Award

By on August 15, 2017 in Awards with 0 Comments

There is a cardinal rule in workers’ compensation trials that employers and defense counsel must follow: never try a case on reports unless the exposure is minimal.  To put it another way, where the exposure is significant, the employer must bring in a medical witness for testimony and cross examine the petitioner’s expert.  The employer […]

Share

Continue Reading »

UPS Prevails By Means of Occupational Statute of Limitations Defense on Claim for Bilateral Knee Replacement Surgery

By on August 10, 2017 in Key Defenses with 0 Comments
UPS Prevails By Means of Occupational Statute of Limitations Defense on Claim for Bilateral Knee Replacement Surgery

The best defense against an occupational disease claim is often the statute of limitations.  That is how the employer won in Mara v. United Parcel Service, A-3691-15T4 (App. Div. August 4, 2017). The case involved a package car driver named Craig Mara who began working for UPS in 1983.  He filed a claim petition in […]

Share

Continue Reading »

How Employers Can Reduce Permanency Awards In New Jersey At No Cost

By on August 3, 2017 in Awards with 0 Comments
How Employers Can Reduce Permanency Awards In New Jersey At No Cost

Permanency awards in the New Jersey Division of Workers’ Compensation can amount to very significant dollars.  An award of 40% partial permanent disability at 2017 rates amounts to $114,720 – tax free.  Furthermore, the case can be reopened within two years from the last date of payment for further permanency benefits.  If the employee reopens […]

Share

Continue Reading »

New Jersey Supreme Court Rejects Summary Judgment for Hospital in Terminating Disabled Employee

By on July 25, 2017 in Court Rulings with 0 Comments
New Jersey Supreme Court Rejects Summary Judgment for Hospital in Terminating Disabled Employee

Workers’ compensation claims often lead to complex disability discrimination law suits, and the recent New Jersey Supreme Court case of Grande v. Saint Clare’s Health System (A-67-15) (July 12, 2017) provides a good example of this.   The case concerned the termination of a registered nurse by the hospital following a series of work-related injuries involving […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Appellate Division Finds Employee Status, Not Casual Employee Or Independent Contractor Status

By on July 18, 2017 in Court Rulings with 0 Comments
Appellate Division Finds Employee Status, Not Casual Employee Or Independent Contractor Status

Michael Savio was injured on a job site on June 1, 2006.  He stated that he worked for Matthew Giambri for four weeks on two job sites, pouring concrete on one site, and doing plumbing work on the other site.  Giambri paid him $150 per day to pour concrete; otherwise, he paid him $100 to […]

Share

Continue Reading »

Top