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...
A North Carolina appellate court reversed a decision by the state's Industrial Commission that had dismissed with prejudice an employee's injury claim for her failure to comply with discovery orders. Finding that there had been no showing that the employer been materially prejudiced, nor had the employer or its carrier come forward with evidence that claimant's delay had impaired their ability to locate witnesses, medical records, treating physicians, or any other data, the appellate court said the Commission's use of the extreme sanction was not justified. As to the employer’s argument that it had been prejudiced by being unable to direct the employee's medical care, the Court stressed that the employer only had the right to direct care when it had accepted the claim. Here, it had not done so.
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 Lauziere v. Stanley Martin Cmtys., LLC, 2020 N.C. App. LEXIS 352 (May 5, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 126.13.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.