Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP

THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER LLP

Partnering Smart Solutions

Menu
  • About UsMENU
    • About the Firm
    • Recognition & Awards
    • Attorney Positions
    • Staff Positions
  • Our PeopleMENU
    • Our Attorneys
    • Our Paralegals
  • Practice Areas
  • News
  • Events
  • LocationsMENU
    • Allentown, PA
    • Ambler, PA
    • Baltimore, MD
    • Fairfax, VA
    • Hampton, NJ
    • Harrisburg, PA
    • Mount Laurel, NJ
    • New York, NY
    • Philadelphia, PA
    • Pittsburgh, PA
    • Richmond, VA
    • Washington, DC
    • Wilkes-Barre, PA

Partnering Smart Solutions

eNotes: Workers’ Compensation – November 2023 – Washington, DC

November 16, 2023

SIGNIFICANT CASE SUMMARIES

Washington, DC Case Summary

Stuart Anderson v. Pro Football Inc. et al.
DC Compensation Review Board
No. 20-000024

Decided: October 12, 2023

Applying the manifestation rule, the Claimant’s claim was barred by one year limitations, and limitations were not tolled because the Employer had no notice of injury and therefore no duty to file a FROI.

Background

The Claimant played professional football for the Washington Redskins (now known as the Washington Commanders) in the mid-1980s. In 2018 and 2019, he filed claims against the team under the Workers’ Compensation Act, seeking medical treatment for arthritis in his hips that he attributed to injuries and cumulative trauma he had sustained as a professional football player. The Employer disputed the claim based on limitations. The Claimant alleged that limitations were tolled because the Employer had notice of the claim in the 1980’s based on his telling the team trainer that he was having problems in his hips, and the Employer failed to file a First Report of Injury.

Holding

In a case in which a former professional football player filed claims against his former team, seeking medical treatment for arthritis in his hips, the Court of Appeals concluded that (1) the one-year time limit in D.C. Code Ann. § 32-1514(a) applied to the former player’s claims; (2) The ALJ properly discredited the former player’s testimony that he told his trainer about his hip pain such that the one-year limitations period on filing a claim was not tolled under § 32-1532(f).

Takeaway

This case reaffirms the manifestation rule for cumulative trauma cases (the date the employee first seeks medical treatment for his/her symptoms or the date the employee stops working due to his/her symptoms, whichever first occurs). The decision further reiterates that the statute of limitations defense is only enforceable if the employer did not have notice of the injury or if the employer had notice and filed a First Report of Injury.

Questions about this case can be directed to Jamie DeSisto at (443) 641-0558 or jdesisto@tthlaw.com.

RELATED PROFESSIONALS

  • Jamie L. DeSisto

RELATED LOCATIONS

  • Washington, DC

RELATED PRACTICE AREAS

  • Workers’ Compensation

Attorneys

Meet our team of attorneys.

Meet Our Attorneys

Practice Areas

Defending clients with professional integrity.

View Practice Areas

Offices

Explore our locations positioned to serve you.

Find a Location

© 2025 Thomas, Thomas & Hafer LLP | Disclaimer | Staff Login