Two cases illustrate how workers' comp plays out in professional sports
The two cases provide a unique chance to look at how workers’ comp plays out in pro sports and why it is the least desirable route to recovery for players.
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.
Injuries sideline careers, but are they compensable?
Emmanuel Acho sustained a right thumb injury while playing for the Eagles in 2015. The Texas Longhorns linebacker was taken by the Cleveland Browns in the sixth round of the 2012 NFL draft. Acho would miss the entire 2012 season with a leg injury and was traded to the Eagles in April 2013. Ultimately, he was released in September of that year and signed to the New York Giants’ practice squad before returning to the Eagles in October 2013. Acho logged six total games that season, mostly on special teams.
In 2014, Acho saw an increased role with the Eagles, logging snaps in 14 games with time at linebacker and on special teams. Acho sustained a first thumb injury on Aug. 11, 2015, in practice. He continued to play but then significantly fractured the same thumb in a preseason game against the Baltimore Ravens on Aug. 22, 2015. The injury would require surgery and Acho was swiftly cut from the roster. He was re-signed after the pins in his thumb were removed in November 2015, but played no games and was eventually released for good just 16 days later. Despite tryouts for other teams, Acho would never see gametime on an NFL field again. He received a three-week settlement check from the Eagles, per the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement.
The other player in question, Chris Maragos, was a seasoned NFL veteran. Maragos was drafted by the 49ers in 2010. He was drafted as a defensive back but really found a niche on special teams and became a standout leader on several special teams’ units. After winning a Super Bowl with the Seattle Seahawks in 2014, Maragos signed with the Eagles. He quickly became a fan-favorite for his hard-nosed style of play that embodied the city of Philadelphia.
Unfortunately, Maragos suffered a significant knee injury against the Carolina Panthers on Oct. 12, 2017, right in the middle of the last Super Bowl run for the Eagles. The injury, initially diagnosed as a posterior cruciate ligament tear, would sideline the pro-bowler for the rest of the season and he had to watch from the sidelines as green confetti showered his teammates on Feb. 4, 2018.
Maragos fell under the care of Dr. James Bradley, a well-known knee surgeon among the NFL and Rothman Orthopedics. Surgery was initially performed to repair the knee and Maragos was expected to return to the field the next season. However, in May 2018, an MRI revealed that Maragos’s injury had been getting worse and he was suffering from a persistent partial tear. But instead of holding off his activities, Bradley and Rothman Orthopedics allowed Maragos to advance his rehab, including running on dry land. Unfortunately, these decisions led to an attempted but rushed return to action. What was an established career with significant years ahead had suddenly ended.
Upon further review
To recap, Acho was hurt playing the game. He never fully recovered from the injuries until approximately three years later, but it was these injuries that prevented him from ever returning to the game. Maragos, also hurt during a game, never recovered from his knee injuries, and never stepped on the field again because of the same. Despite the similarities, these two cases played out extremely differently.
On Aug. 20, 2018, Acho filed a claim petition against the Eagles, seeking wage loss benefits from the date of the second injury and ongoing. He also filed a review and reinstatement petition referrable to the first date of injury. Following a full round of litigation, the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found in favor of Acho, granting total disability benefits from August through November 2015 and then partial benefits from November 2015 through September 2019, when an IME doctor found Acho was fully recovered from the thumb injury. The Eagles were given a small credit for the settlement check. The decision was appealed to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, who affirmed the WCJ’s decision. The Eagles then filed a petition to review with the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.
Before the Commonwealth Court, the Eagles reiterated their argument that Acho’s release and lack of playing football was not due to the injury, despite the overwhelming circumstantial and medical evidence. The Eagles also argued that Acho had been cut and resigned for portions of both previous seasons and that the cut in 2015 was of a similar nature. The court responded that “in 2015, the claimant was released immediately after the surgery on his thumb and was paid a three-week injury settlement. The 2015 release thus clearly was not routine or based on any past practice, but rather was due to the claimant’s injury and perceived inability to play.” They went on to conclude that the Eagles could not point to any evidence stating the injury was NOT the cause of Acho’s failure to continue playing.
Despite it being clear that Maragos also sustained a work-related injury, his path led to a civil suit against Dr. Bradley and Rothman Orthopedics. He may have had a workers’ compensation claim at one point, but it is certainly not where he ended up. He argued a medical malpractice claim that their treatments were the actual cause of his career-ending injury. The question then becomes, why did Maragos’ claim not fall under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act? Why was his recovery so much more than Acho’s? Should Acho have also taken his shot at a medical malpractice claim?
Looking at the background of both players, it becomes an interesting contrast as to how the Workers’ Compensation Act (the act) can impact professional athletes. Acho was not an impactful player. He had trouble staying on rosters during his short career. Sure, there is a legal opinion that the injury ended his career, but is that really the reason? Acho, who has established himself as an analyst and media personality, was a subpar NFL linebacker. He was a sixth-round pick with a longshot to establish a successful, lengthy NFL career. He was a platoon roster spot when he was under contract. Interestingly, he has been very outspoken against the Eagles training staff in 2017 and 2018, right before the claim was filed. He is clearly not alone in this sentiment given Maragos’ situation. Unfortunately, that did not matter in Acho’s case. The WCJ found that the claimant’s lack of success in joining other teams was not due to his talent level or lack thereof, but rather a thumb fracture that Acho was cleared to return from after only three weeks. It is a disappointing decision for employers across the state.
In comparison, Maragos was a highly impactful player. He was a team leader on special teams for two Super Bowl winning teams. He was known throughout the league for big hits and smart plays on special teams. While with the Eagles, Maragos earned a Captain patch for Special Teams over his last two seasons with the team. Unlike Acho, Maragos would have had a much longer and more lucrative career. The outcome of each legal matter shows this.
Acho’s best chance for a recovery was going through a workers’ compensation claim to argue that his injury stopped him from playing. While he will likely be paid a significant amount under the Commonwealth Court’s decision, it will not come close to $43.5 million. Maragos, under a different set of circumstances, had to recover for much higher prospective career earnings. Maragos also made the wise decision of taking the human aspect of his claim in front of a jury. He was able to present testimony from several teammates, including Super Bowl LII MVP Nick Foles. In a release after the verdict, Maragos said “on Sunday, my team played in the Super Bowl, and I could only watch and wonder whether I could have been out there with them had I received proper medical care. While I live in constant pain and will never get back on the field, I hope this decision sends a message to teams’ medical staffs that players are people, not just contracts.”
Maragos took full advantage of the third-party case that workers’ compensation practitioners see every day. The Eagles, of course, would have no problem with Maragos filing suit against the third parties in this case, Bradley and Rothman. He could not sue the team directly as the act’s exclusive remedy provisions would have significantly capped any recovery in limiting his claims to recovery under the act. The Eagles would have also retained their full subrogation rights if any workers’ compensation benefits had been paid to Maragos. The law of Pennsylvania holds that an employer can retain subrogation rights in medical malpractice claims when they can establish the fund that it seeks subrogation was for the same compensable injury for which the employer was liable under the act; and the employer was compelled to make compensation payments as a result of the negligent medical treatment. For example, in a case involving surgery, it was held that the employer has the burden of proving that but for the negligent surgery the employee would be employable.
When it is all boiled down, these two cases, decided just 10 days apart, show an interesting contrast in professional sports and the act’s impact on different players. Acho, a player that struggled to stay relevant, received questionable health care, sought multiple opinions, but settled for a workers’ compensation claim. Maragos, a team captain and impact player, received questionable treatment and lost $43.5 million in career earnings, at least according to a jury. Workers’ compensation cases were already very rare in professional sports. However, after seeing the outcome of these two cases, we can expect to see less and less professional athletes filing workers’ compensation claims in Pennsylvania in the future. The exclusive remedy provision may come into play in future attempts, but it would not be surprising for many future players to follow Maragos’ lead. Why settle for likely only hundreds of thousands of dollars when you can make FOUR TIMES your career earnings in one medical malpractice claim.
Michael Hyland, an associate with Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby, represents employers, insurance companies and third-party administrators in a variety of workers’ compensation matters. Contact him at mhyland@wglaw.com.
Christian Davis, a partner with the firm, defends casinos, nursing homes, school districts, financial institutions, manufacturing companies, staffing companies, insurance carriers, self-insured entities, and third-party administrators in workers’ compensation matters. Contact him at cdavis@wglaw.com.
Related: