In early February, the city of Philadelphia was truly bleeding green. As the Philadelphia Eagles, the true heart and soul of this blue-collar town, prepared to play the Kansas City Chiefs in the Super Bowl, they were also involved in two disputes off the field. These other disputes, however, had nothing to do with defensive or offensive schemes on the field, but in the courtroom. The disputes involved two former players who suffered career-ending injuries. However, one case was tried through the workers’ compensation process and the other through a civil jury trial. While the workers’ compensation case resulted in a small windfall of under $100,000, the medical malpractice claim resulted in a $43.5 million verdict for the player.

So why the discrepancy in awards? Why was one case a workers’ compensation claim and one a medical malpractice claim? The two cases, decided only 10 days apart, provide us with a unique chance to look at how workers’ compensation plays out in professional sports and why, for players who are paid so well, it is the least desirable route to recovery.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]