By Robert G. Rassp, author of The Lawyer’s Guide to the AMA Guides and California Workers’ Compensation (LexisNexis) Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this treatise are...
Oakland, CA – Private self-insured claim volume in the California workers' compensation system fell 9.5% in 2023, producing the biggest year-to-year decline in private self-insured claim frequency...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board No matter the source of your media consumption, it seems that the topic...
By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Who doesn’t agree with the fact that “[w]e should not interpret or apply statutory language...
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’...
In a 5–2 decision, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, reversing an earlier decision by the Commonwealth Court, held that a physician performing an Impairment Rating Evaluation (IRE) under § 306(a.2)(1) of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act [77 Pa. Stat. § 511.2(1) must exercise independent professional judgment and, therefore, consider all conditions that the physician believes are related to the worker’s work-related injury, not just those that are designated in the notice of compensation payable (the “NCP”). Speaking for the majority, Chief Justice Sayer indicated that where, as here, the IRE physician failed to consider a worker’s alleged psychological injuries—which were not specifically mentioned in the NCP—the IRE report was invalid. Justice Baer dissented, saying the majority’s decision had the effect of allowing an injured worker to invalidate an IRE by identifying symptoms or conditions that had not been previously identified to the employer. Justice Wecht also dissented, indicating, inter alia, that the majority relied upon the AMA Guides, 6th ed., in spite of the fact that the use of that edition might well be inappropriate [see Protz v. W.C.A.B. (Derry Area School District, 124 A.3d 406 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015), appeal granted, 133 A.3d 733 (Pa. 2016).
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 Advance.
See Duffey v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Trola-Dyne, Inc.), 2017 Pa. LEXIS 132 (Jan. 19, 2017)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 131.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law