Franch v. Ankney

How later courts described this case

• holding that when an employee settles a third-party action after filing a workers’ compensation claim and receiving compensation benefits, forfeiture is not the proper remedy unless the employer can show that it suffered material prejudice as a result of the settlement
• concluding that “[t]he employer’s rights in the claim against the third party are only those derived through the employee” (citing Johnson *43 v. Miles, 188 Md. 455, 459, 53 A.2d 30, 32 (1947))
• holding that trial court properly struck expert testimony after it had been presented to the jury when it became clear that the testimony was based on an incorrect interpretation of the law.”
• stating that the Act permits an employer to sue where “the employee’s injury resulted from the tortious conduct of a third[ ]party”

Written by the judges who cited it.