By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Practitioners beware! Death benefit trials often raise intricate and unique evidentiary conundrums. Obtaining...
Oakland, CA – California’s State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) rose nearly 3.8 percent in the year ending March 31, 2024, which will result in an increase in California workers’ compensation...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 10 October 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, Presiding Judge, WCAB Los Angeles, California Division of Workers’ Compensation Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this article are solely those of...
Oakland, CA – Migraine Drugs represented less than 1% of all prescriptions dispensed to California injured workers in 2023 but they consumed 4.7% of workers’ compensation drug payments, a nearly...
Here's a sneak peek of a recent noteworthy panel decision that will be added soon to the LexisNexis services:
Medical-Legal Procedure; Assignment of QME Panel.
WCAB granted removal and rescinded WCJ’s order that applicant violated LC 4062.2(c) by striking name from panel QME list prematurely, thereby nullifying the strike, when WCAB found that (1) although LC 4062.2(c) envisions that parties will use 10-day period after assignment of a panel to meaningfully confer on an AME, if a party strikes a name during 10-day period, that strike is not automatically rendered a nullity under LC 4062.2(c), (2) if a party strikes a name from panel during 10-day period, responding party has remainder of 10 days plus 3 working days to strike a name, (3) in such a circumstance, responding party must communicate that strike to initial striking party on or before the 13th day after assignment, without using additional 10 days outlined in LC 4062.2(d) to simultaneously issue notice of panel QME appointment and strike implied by making appointment, and (4) although applicant requested a new panel in her petition for reconsideration, LC 4062.2(c) clearly mandates that after each party has exercised a strike, remaining QME shall serve as medical evaluator. See Guillen panel decision.