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...
A divided Supreme Court of Minnesota held that a firefighter may proceed against his employer for its alleged discrimination under Minnesota’s Human Rights Act (“HRA”) in spite of the fact that he had already received workers’ compensation benefits for a work-related injury; his civil action was not barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act (“WCA”). Following a series of injuries, the firefighter was given a prescription for flat-bottomed shoes (i.e., shoes without a heel). His employer initially reimbursed the firefighter for the expense of black tennis shoes, but later a Deputy Chief told the firefighter he could not wear them since they did not comply with firefighting regulations. The firefighter contended the employer’s action in failing to accommodate his need for special shoes violated the HRA. The majority held that the firefighter could pursue claims under both the WCA and the HRA because each provided a different, distinct cause of action that redressed a discrete type of injury to an employee.
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 Daniel v. City of Minneapolis, 2019 Minn. LEXIS 92 (Feb. 27, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see