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...
COMPLEX EMPLOYMENT ISSUES FOR CALIFORNIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION A new softbound supplement to Rassp & Herlick, California Workers’ Compensation Law 284 pages PIN #0006801214509 For...
By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Just when you thought the right of “due process” was on the brink of destruction, the legislature...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Over the past several decades California has implemented broad legislative...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 9 September 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...
A Board decision that disqualified an injured worker from receiving future wage replacement benefits was erroneous where the New York appellate court found that the Board’s decision had been based on speculation and conjecture. The court acknowledged that the Board had broad latitude in finding the facts, but it said there was no basis for the the Board’s conclusion that the worker’s movements, as depicted in a surveillance videotape, were inconsistent with the range of motion the worker had described for a medical professional. The Court said the Board had mischaracterized the videotape.
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 Matter of Persons v Halmar Intl., LLC, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2766 (3rd Dept. Apr. 11, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 39.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see