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...
Reversing the state’s Court of Civil Appeals, the Supreme Court of Oklahoma has reinstated a decision by a three-judge panel of the Workers’ Compensation Court that earlier held a workers’ compensation claimant was entitled to additional compensation following a freakish accident that occurred while the claimant was receiving medical treatment for an earlier work-related injury. The claimant, who sustained a compensable 2008 injury to various body parts, including the left knee and cervical spine, had sought treatment in 2012 for continued cervical discomfort. She traveled to a medical facility, underwent a steroid epidural injection to her cervical spine, and suffered additional injuries when being wheeled into the recovery area. Medical personnel had placed her in a wheelchair without foot rests in spite of the fact that she was still partially under sedation. As they wheeled her to recovery, her feet drug on the floor, her knees went underneath the wheelchair, and she was suddenly thrown forward, causing additional injury to her knee. The employer contended the actions of the medical personnel constituted an intervening action, but the Workers’ Compensation Court—and the Supreme Court—disagreed.
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
See City of Tulsa v. Hodge, 2018 OK 65, 2018 Okla. LEXIS 68 (Sept. 11, 2018)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 10.09.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see