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...
Where an injured employee and the employer (and carrier) executed a settlement agreement, forwarding it on to the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission for approval and the employee died from unrelated causes two days before the agreement was formally approved, the employee’s death did not constitute a material mistake of fact that would allow the employer to reopen the case and negate the settlement, held a state appellate court, in a split decision. The Court noted that under the normal procedures within Mississippi, such a settlement agreement was due to be approved unless the Commission specifically found that the settlement was not in the employee’s best interest. There had been a meeting of the minds; the settlement agreement stood.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Taylor v. Reliance Well Serv., 2017 Miss. App. LEXIS 296 (May 23, 2017)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 131.04.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see