By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Practitioners beware! Death benefit trials often raise intricate and unique evidentiary conundrums. Obtaining...
Oakland, CA – California’s State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) rose nearly 3.8 percent in the year ending March 31, 2024, which will result in an increase in California workers’ compensation...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 10 October 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, Presiding Judge, WCAB Los Angeles, California Division of Workers’ Compensation Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this article are solely those of...
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...
The putative class action filed by an employee against his employer alleging its use of a fingerprint timekeeping system violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) was not barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act, held a federal district court. Stressing that the plaintiff had not alleged any sort of physical or mental injury that resulted from the employer’s actions, the federal court predicted that the Supreme Court of Illinois would likely find plaintiff’s alleged injuries were not the sort that fit within the purview of the state Act. Accordingly, the tort action against the employer was not barred, at least as a matter of law.
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 Treadwell v. Power Solutions Int’l, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215467 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 16, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.