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...
The United States Supreme Court has denied review of the Sixth Circuit’s en banc decision in Jackson v. Sedwick Claims Mngmt. Servs. [731 F.3d 556 (6th Cir. 2013)]. Readers will recall that the Jackson case, which questions whether an injured employee may recover under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) when an employer, the employer’s claims administrator, and an examining physician, using the mail, allegedly collude so as to deny or terminate the employee’s workers’ compensation benefits, has been a veritable “yo-yo” between the Sixth Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Last year, a divided Sixth Circuit said that the employees’ expectation of benefits was not a sufficient property interest under RICO and added that while the RICO law was to be given liberal construction, it was not intended as “a means for federalizing personal injury tort claims arising under state law.” Where a claimant suffered a compensable back injury and medical evidence later indicated she had reached maximum medical.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Jackson v. Sedwick Claims Mngmt. Servs, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 3239 (May 5, 2014) [2014 U.S. LEXIS 3239 (May 5, 2014)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.03 [100.03]
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site