When do the exclusivity provisions of Labor Code section 3600 permit an action for law at damages? By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’...
Oakland, CA -- Payments for medical-legal evaluations and reports used to resolve medical disputes in California work injury claims have increased more than expected since a new Med-Legal Fee Schedule...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 6 June 2024 A Report of En Banc and Significant Panel Decisions of the WCAB and Selected Court Opinions of Related Interest, With a Digest of WCAB Decisions...
By Hon. Robert G. Rassp and Hon. Clint Feddersen Questioning the Vocational Expert [a] Depositions Counsel will often need to take the deposition of the vocation expert. Live testimony of a vocational...
Oakland, CA – A bill that would give a presumption of compensability to farmworker heat-related injury claims if the employer is found to be out of compliance with Cal/OSHA’s outdoor heat illness...
An Arkansas trial court erred in concluding that it had subject-matter jurisdiction over the employee's complaint in which it was alleged that the defendant employed the plaintiff but failed to secure workers’ compensation benefits for the employees. The appellate court held that under clear precedent, the state’s Workers' Compensation Commission had exclusive, original jurisdiction to determine the facts that established subject-matter jurisdiction. The employee had raised the issue himself; thus, his action was barred by the exclusive-remedy provision under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-105(a). The appellate court added that the mere allegation that the employer failed to provide workers' compensation benefits for his employees did not establish as a matter of law that he failed to secure the payment of compensation as required under Ark. Code Ann. §§ 11-9-105(b)(1), 11-9-404(a)(1).
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Stan v. Vences, 2019 Ark. App. 56, 2019 Ark. App. LEXIS 66 (Jan. 30, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 102.06.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law