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...
Like a number of other states, Ohio has a provision in its comp act [ORC Ann. § 4123.54(H)] precluding workers’ compensation coverage for an employee when: (1) the employee is a resident of another state; (2) the employee is insured in a state other than Ohio; and (3) the employee is only temporarily within Ohio when injured. An Ohio appellate court has held that a Florida resident, who worked for a Texas non-subscribing employer as a truck driver, and who was injured while temporarily in Ohio, was not precluded from participating in Ohio’s workers’ compensation system; he was not similarly insured in Texas. It was undisputed that the employer purchased a third-party insurance policy in compliance with Texas law whereby the truck driver received disability income, dismemberment benefits, and payment of his medical expenses. The court held that such coverage under a qualified ERISA plan was not the equivalent of insuring the worker under a state system. The implication is that if the Texas employer had opted to be covered by the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, the result would have been different.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Linardos v. Joe Tex, Inc., 2014-Ohio–4522, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 4435 (Oct. 13, 2014) [2014-Ohio–4522, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 4435 (Oct. 13, 2014)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, §§ 102.01, 142.03, 143.02, 143.07 [102.01, 142.03, 143.02, 143.07]
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site
_______________________________________________
ATTENTION: RISK MANAGERS, INSURANCE & HR PROFESSIONALS, ATTORNEYS, POLICY MAKERS
Special Discount Rate of $79.50 + tax & shipping for a limited time only
New! Workers' Compensation Emerging Issues Analysis, 2014 Edition (400 pp). Read flyer & Order today. Books expected to ship 10/24/2014.
State by State Workers' Comp Legislation for 2014. Expert analysis and commentary. Larson Spotlight on Interesting Cases.
This year's top issue: The Temporary Workforce and Impact on Workers' Compensation