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...
While the normal rule in most jurisdictions is that a judge or board may not apportion a claimant’s PPD award based upon a preexisting condition that did not prevent the employee from effectively performing his or her job duties at the time of a subsequent work-related injury, New York has an exception when it comes to schedule loss of use (“SLU”) cases. Based on that exception, a New York appellate court affirmed a finding by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board apportioning an injured employee’s SLU injury to the right leg between the employee’s February 2007 work-related injury and his 2005 nonwork-related injury. A medical expert opined that the employee’s 2005 surgical procedure involved the excision of the meniscus in the employee’s right knee. That procedure, standing alone, would have resulted in a 7.5 percent SLU finding and would have been amenable to a scheduled award. Apportionment was, therefore, appropriate in the case.
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
See Matter of the Claim of Sanchez v. STS Steel, 2017 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7001 (Oct. 5, 2017)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 90.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see