﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="../StyleSheet/rss.xsl"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Portal Emerging Issues</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/portal</link><description>LexisNexis Communities</description><copyright>http://www.lexisnexis.com/terms/copyright.aspx</copyright><atom:link href="http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/portal/Rss.aspx?id=406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Five Recent Workers’ Comp Cases You Should Know About (11/18/2011) – Paving Worker Strikes Bowling Ball With Sledgehammer, Loses Eye and Workers' Comp Claim</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=167276&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=167276&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Larson's Spotlight on Death Benefits to Nonresident Aliens, Accidental Injury, Third Party Settlement Proceeds, Work Order Violation, and Prisoners. Larson's surveys the latest case developments that you need to know about. Thomas A. Robinson, the staff writer for &lt;i&gt;Larson's Workers' Compensation Law&lt;/i&gt;, has compiled the list below.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="background-color: #ffff99;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="background-color: #ffff99;"&gt;PA: Paving Worker Strikes Bowling Ball With Sledgehammer, Loses Eye and Workers' Comp Claim &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica</description><author>larsonspotlight@aol.com (Larson's Spotlight)</author><pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 09:09:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Workers' Comp Fraud Blotter (11/17/2011) – Mum’s the Word For Double-Dipping Florist Who Created Floral Arrangements While On Disability</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=167274&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=167274&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Each week we'll be surveying what the media, state agencies, insurance companies, and others report in terms of workers' comp fraud. Just like a police blotter, our workers' comp fraud blotter lists recent arrests, charges, convictions and investigations.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;img src="/Community/workerscompensationlaw/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/Images.WCLC+Images/WCLC-Frog-eating-spider.gif" border="0" style="max-width: 550px;" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span</description><author>wcfraudteam@yahoo.com (LexisNexis Workers' Comp Fraud Team)</author><pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 09:08:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Workers' Comp Fraud Blotter (11/3/2011) – Payroll Company Business Executive and Workers’ Comp Attorney Facing Theft Charges</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164419&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164419&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Each week we'll be surveying what the media, state agencies, insurance companies, and others report in terms of workers' comp fraud. Just like a police blotter, our workers' comp fraud blotter lists recent arrests, charges, convictions and investigations.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;img src="/Community/workerscompensationlaw/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/Images.WCLC+Images/WCLC-Frog-eating-spider.gif" border="0" style="max-width: 550px;" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span</description><author>wcfraudteam@yahoo.com (LexisNexis Workers' Comp Fraud Team)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:43:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>MO: Is falling on the employer’s lot in the morning enough to obtain benefits?</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164417&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164417&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The recent Commission case &lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;Lantie Wilson v Buchanan County&lt;/span&gt;, Oct. 14, 2011, 2011 Mo WCLR Lexis 206, involved a claimant who fell on the employer's lot reporting to work. The Commission affirmed an award of benefits and concluded that there was no need to even consider if claimant had equal exposure to falling away from work because he was reporting for work and that was a risk "related to employment."&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The issue of whether a fall on a parking lot fall is compensable has often&amp;nbsp;addressed if the hazard was a common generic risk (such as black ice) that claimant might encounter in non-employment.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;A person who falls on property</description><author>klug@huckhowe.com (Martin Klug)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:57:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Size Matters: NCCI Attributes Medical Costs Trends to Claim Categories</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164415&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164415&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Many studies have analyzed why the medical componen&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a name="_GoBack"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;t of workers' compensation costs have risen rapidly the past several years despite the recession. Explanations for the higher costs have ranged from &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="/community/workerscompensationlaw/blogs/workerscompensationlawblog/archive/2011/09/20/ncci-addresses-workers-compensation-prescription-drugs-costs.aspx"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;increased workers' compensation prescription drug costs&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt; to &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="/community/workerscompensationlaw/blogs/workerscompensationlawblog/archive/2011/09/29/study-links-dow-jones</description><author>jmstahl@comcast.net (John Stahl)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:42:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>California: 25 Noteworthy Panel Decisions That You Should Know About</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164412&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164412&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The following list contains our picks for the top "noteworthy" panel decisions issued by the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board for 2011. Lexis.com subscribers can link to the panel decisions below.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Reminder: Practitioners should check the subsequent history of a panel decision before citing to it. Our list is current as of 11/3/2011.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;b&gt;1. Rochelle Gladden (Deceased)&lt;/b&gt;&lt;b&gt; v. State of California, Department of Corrections &amp;amp; Rehabilitation, Parole and</description><author>Robin.E.Kobayashi@lexisnexis.com (Robin E. Kobayashi)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:22:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>MO: Toxic Exposure From Fumes Hanging In Air</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164418&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164418&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Claimant worked 10 years in Jasper County making components for battery cells and developed a rare cancer,&amp;nbsp;IgA myeloma. As a result of either the condition or the stem cell transplant and chemotherapy, he required treatment for about 5 years for kidney disease, recurrent skin basal cell carcinomas, carpal and cubital tunnel releases, and foot orthotics. Claimant, 57, continues to have dizziness, fatigue, and cannot walk normally.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Neither party obtained air samples or precise information regarding the duration or dosage of any exposure of benzene or other chemicals. Claimant's expert attributed the onset to "airborne chemicals" and several co-workers testified to ineffective safety</description><author>klug@huckhowe.com (Martin Klug)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:04:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Texas: TPCIGNA v Brooks 03-10-00428</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164416&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164416&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="/documents/images/20080904054213_large.jpg" alt="Stuart Colburn" border="0" style="max-width: 550px; border: 0;" /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;b&gt;By Stuart D. Colburn, Esq., Shareholder, Downs Stanford&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;This case concerns application of the TX Supreme Court's decision in &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.lexis.com/xlink?showcidslinks=on&amp;amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00248&amp;amp;searchtype=get&amp;amp;search=330+S.W.3d+239" title="Lexis.com"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #0000ff;"&gt;Leordeanu v. American Protection Ins. Co., 330 S.W.3d 239 (Tex 2010)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style</description><author>scolburn@downsstanford.com (Stuart D. Colburn)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:50:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Cal. Comp. Cases November Advanced Postings (11/3/2011)</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164413&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164413&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="background-color: #ffff99;"&gt;Featured Case of the Week: Airline Pilot's Claim for Injuries Barred by Going and Coming Rule&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Dann Peter Shubin, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Southwest Airlines, PSI, administered by Cambridge Pasadena, Respondents, &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.lexis.com/xlink?showcidslinks=on&amp;amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00248&amp;amp;searchtype=get&amp;amp;search=2011%20Cal.%20Wrk.%20Comp.%20LEXIS%20166"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;2011 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 166&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;</description><author>CCC@aol.com (California Compensation Cases Staff)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:34:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>LexisNexis 2011 Special Achievement Award for Workers’ Compensation</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164408&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164408&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;img src="/COMMUNITY/WORKERSCOMPENSATIONLAW/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/Images.WCLC+Images/WCLC-Special-Achievement-Awards-Badge-2011.jpg" alt="Workers' Compensation Special Achievement Award" border="0" style="max-width: 550px; border: 0;" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The LexisNexis Workers' Compensation Law Community is pleased to announce the recipient of its first Special Achievement Award. This year we would like to honor a social media phenomenon on LinkedIn - the &lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&amp;amp;gid=1328307"&gt;&lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #0000ff;"&gt;Work Comp Analysis</description><author>lexisnexisworkerscomplawstaff@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Workers' Comp Law Community Staff)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:12:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Five Recent Workers’ Comp Cases You Should Know About (11/4/2011) – Injured Worker's Tort Action Against Landlord Corporation Closely Related to Her Tenant Employer May Move Forward</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164404&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=164404&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Larson's Spotlight on Tort Action, Retaliatory Discharge, Black Lung, Disqualification From Benefits, and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity. Larson's surveys the latest case developments that you need to know about. Thomas A. Robinson, the staff writer for &lt;i&gt;Larson's Workers' Compensation Law&lt;/i&gt;, has compiled the list below.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="background-color: #ffff99;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="background-color: #ffff99;"&gt;NE: Injured Worker's Tort Action Against Corporation Closely Related to Her Employer May Move Forward&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica</description><author>larsonspotlight@aol.com (Larson's Spotlight)</author><pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:05:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>A Little Bit of March Madness in September – A New Ruling from the DE IAB Regarding a Company Athletic Event</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=156461&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=156461&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Props to Larry Kimmel of Kimmel, Carter, Roman &amp;amp; Peltz,&amp;nbsp; who rather sheepishly shared our case du jour.&amp;nbsp; He was embarrassed because he won and didn't want to appear like he was trying to call attention to himself.&amp;nbsp; Anyone who knows Larry knows that that is just not his way.&amp;nbsp; Thank you Larry for bringing an important ruling to our attention.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;I bring you &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="/COMMUNITY/WORKERSCOMPENSATIONLAW/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/Documents.WCLC+Documents/Calvin-Williams-v-Bank-of-America-IAB-DE.pdf" title="Right Click to Download"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;</description><author>croberts@ycst.com (Cassandra Roberts)</author><pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:04:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Save the Date! DSBA Work Comp Section Annual Breakfast Seminar</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155959&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155959&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;It's Christmas in January, folks! The annual Work Comp Section seminar will be held this year on Wednesday January 25th at 8:30 a.m. at the Riverfront.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;This event, chaired by Gary Baker and Jessica Welch, has become overwhelmingly popular and is designed to cover the current "hot topics" in comp.&amp;nbsp; Yours truly will be presenting a CaseLaw Update that is specific to medical treatment and UR since our IAB is deciding issues at an alarming pace that put the meat on the bones of the statutory framework of the (relatively) new medical statute.&amp;nbsp; Talk about "meat on the bones"-- we haven't seen this much flesh since the Jenny Craig Poster Boy.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font</description><author>croberts@ycst.com (Cassandra Roberts)</author><pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:25:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Hatchet Job: Delaware IAB Orders Separation of Bills for Compensable Body Part</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155409&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155409&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Today's post is offered up by attorney Chris Logullo of Chrissinger &amp;amp; Baumberger.&amp;nbsp; A recent Motion Day Hearing on the issue of what happens when the carrier requests that the doctor delineate his medical charges to parcel out the compensable treatment for an arguably unrelated body part and the doctor declines to do so.&amp;nbsp; Liberty Mutual's concern in this case, a well-founded one indeed, was that if it paid bills that were subsumed within them the treatment for the disputed low back, they would be vulnerable to the argument that any denial of causation would be deemed waived.&amp;nbsp; In this case there was an acknowledged claim for the neck and shoulder-- the provider was Dr. Jay Fried who testified briefly.&amp;nbsp; Dr. Fried had recorded in his records that the low back was "significant and debilitating," which was somewhat contradictory to the claimant's position that this was "incidental</description><author>croberts@ycst.com (Cassandra Roberts)</author><pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:20:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Review of the Florida Power of Attorney Act and Model Durable POA Form</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155309&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=155309&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;By Susan Calistri Boesger Esq.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;During the Florida 2011 legislative session, Chapter 709 was completely overhauled with the repeal of F.S. &amp;sect; 709.08, and the creation of a new "Florida Power of Attorney Act."&amp;nbsp;Modeled in part after the Uniform Power of Attorney Act, the Florida Power of Attorney Act ("the Act") provides the most comprehensive treatment to date of durable powers of attorney pursuant to statute. The Act purports to govern all powers of attorney, with notable exceptions for "proxy or other delegation to exercise voting rights or management rights,"&amp;nbsp;"powers created on a form prescribed by a government or government subdivision,"&amp;nbsp;a power "to the extent it is coupled with an interest in the subject of the power,"&amp;nbsp;and a power created by</description><author>dougesten.lnc@gmail.com (LexisNexis Community Staff)</author><pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:11:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Tax Aspects of Nonqualified Deferrred Compensation: Avoiding Constructive Receipt</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=130392&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=130392&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Employers and executives must be sure to avoid the doctrine of constructive receipt when drafting deferred compensation arrangements. Specific provisions required by IRC Section 409A must be included in deferred compensation plan, and adhered to by the parties. Statutory requirements include election timing requirements, distribution parameters, non-acceleration of benefits, and funding re-striction.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The general rule of &lt;i&gt;IRC Section 409A&lt;/i&gt;, is twofold:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(1) If the plan under which compensation is deferred does not satisfy</description><author>HarveyFrutkin@placeholder.com (Harvey L. Frutkin)</author><pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:23:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Cross-Border Benefits of Malta's Tax System and the U.S.-Malta Tax Treaty</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=128332&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=128332&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;By &lt;i&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.withersworldwide.com/people/mitchell-r-kops"&gt;Mitchell R. Kops&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.withersworldwide.com/people/sanford-j-davis"&gt;Sanford J. Davis&lt;/a&gt;,&amp;nbsp;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.withersworldwide.com/people/william-j-kambas"&gt;William J. Kambas&lt;/a&gt;, and Theodore C. Ahlgren&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The authors would like to thank &lt;i&gt;&lt;a target="_blank" href="http://www.withersworldwide.com/people/angela-klemack"&gt;Angela M. Klemack&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;, an associate at the firm, for her valuable assistance in the preparation of this article.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans</description><author>WithersBergman@placeholder.com (Withers Bergman LLP Tax Practice)</author><pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:23:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>IRC Section 751 Treatment of Hot Assets</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=127761&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=127761&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;em&gt;By Matthew Cavitch, The Cavitch Law Firm, Memphis, TN&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The linchpin of taxing transfers of partnership interests is IRC Section 751. Under IRC Section 741, when a partner sells his interest, he is entitled to capital gain treatment, except as provided in IRC Section 751. Under IRC Section 731, when a partner receives a partnership distribution in liquidation of his interest, he is entitled to capital gain treatment, except as provided in IRC Section 751. Regarding sales of partnership interests to third parties, IRC Section 751 is pretty straightforward. But regarding sales of partnership interests back to the partnership, IRC Section 751 can get a little intricate.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style=</description><author>LexisNexisStaffTax@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Tax Center )</author><pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:18:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>California: Did You Know? There’s More to the Ogilvie Case Than You Think!</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=123209&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/COMMUNITY/workerscompensationlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=123209&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;On July 29, 2011, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, issued its long awaited decision in Ogilvie v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., which reversed the WCAB en banc decision and remanded the matter back to the WCAB to determine whether Ogilvie effectively rebutted the application of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule. In its decision, the Court reversed use of an individualized diminished future earning capacity adjustment factor as a means to rebut a scheduled DFEC adjustment that came directly from the 2005 PDRS.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Robert G. Rassp, Esq. analyzes the Court's decision, explains the ramifications for practitioners, and shows why, despite the court's reversal</description><author>RRassp@cs.com (Robert G. Rassp, Esq.)</author><pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 16:43:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>State Taxation of Multinationals: Combined Reporting</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=116113&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=116113&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;by Suellen Wolfe *&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;In many states, related entities with certain intercompany transactions must file a combined tax report to more accurately reflect their unitary business operations. Combined reporting is generally required only where there is a high degree of interdependence among related entities. Combined reporting can take one of two forms: worldwide, which includes income from all operations, and water's edge, which includes only income from U.S. affiliates.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Whether the inclusion of income from foreign subsidiaries that transact no business in a state in a combined report is constitutional has been the subject of litigation over the years. For example</description><author>LexisNexisStaffTax@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Tax Center )</author><pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:40:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Lease Accounting Changes to Impact Financial Reporting</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=114688&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=114688&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;em&gt;by Barbara Apostolou - Professor, University of West Virginia, Nicholas Apostolou - Visiting Professor, University of West Virginia, and Jack W. Dorminey - Assistant Professor, University of West Virginia&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;On August 17, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) jointly released exposure drafts (ED) of proposed accounting standards that, as currently written, significantly change lease accounting. Under the proposed model, lessees have only one accounting treatment permitted for all leases. Currently, a lessee may treat a lease as an operating lease or a capitalized lease. The only financial statement</description><author>LexisNexisStaffTax@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Tax Center )</author><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:32:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>New Jersey Corporate Tax Planning and the Apportionment Sales Factor</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=114604&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=114604&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;A State Tax Practice Insights Commentary by Irwin Mittelman&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;INSIGHT&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;In recent years, there have been major changes that have affected apportionment for corporations doing business in New Jersey. In 1995, the corporate apportionment factor was changed to double-weight the sales factor, thus making it fifty percent of the overall allocation factor. The most recent change, made by legislation enacted in 2011, will result in a gradual phase in of the single sales factor apportionment formula. Between 2012 and 2014, the apportionment formula will reflect a more significant sales factor presence, while reducing the property and payroll factors</description><author>LexisNexisStaffTax@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Tax Center )</author><pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:09:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Taxation of Canadian Mining Operations - Provincial Taxes</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=112640&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=112640&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;By&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Peter C. Maxfield, Robert M. Allen CPA and J. Andrew Miller CPA&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Editor's Note: This Emerging Issues Analysis is an edited excerpt from Chapter 13 of the LexisNexis Matthew Bender title &lt;b&gt;Taxation of Mining Operations&lt;/b&gt;. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Each of the provinces and territories of Canada imposes its own corporate income tax at its own tax rate. Most provinces apply their provincial tax rate against taxable income computed under the federal rules and allocated to the particular jurisdiction under the sales/wages formula. For Alberta</description><author>LexisNexisStaffTax@placeholder.com (LexisNexis Tax Center )</author><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:19:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>Rendering Retirement Plan Investment Advice for a Fee</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=110742&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=110742&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;Every retirement plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) must be established and maintained pursuant to a written agreement that must provide for one or more "named fiduciaries" who have the authority to control and manage the operation and administration of the plan. Under ERISA, an entity is generally considered a fiduciary to the extent that it holds any discretionary authority or discretionary responsibility in the administration of an employee benefit plan.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under...&amp;nbsp;ERISA, an "investment manager" must acknowledge its status as a fiduciary in writing and must be a registered investment adviser, a bank, or an insurance company.&amp;nbsp;An investment manager also must have "the power to manage, acquire, or dispose of any asset of a plan"&amp;nbsp;and therefore exercises discretionary authority or control with respect to plan assets.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Regulations</description><author>JayneZanglein@placeholder.com (Jayne Zanglein)</author><pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 11:31:00 -0400</pubDate></item><item><title>The Elusive Basis Problem of the Foreign Tax Credit Limitation</title><link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=107570&amp;AppID=1</link><guid>http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/taxlaw/gotopost.aspx?PostID=107570&amp;AppID=1</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;As we know, Congress tinkered with the foreign tax credit (FTC) rules in 2010 in a number of ways. One of those changes was to add Section 901(m) ("&lt;i&gt;Denial of foreign tax credit with respect to foreign income not subject to United States taxation by reason of covered asset acquisitions&lt;/i&gt;") to the Code. (Education, Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act, P.L. 111-226, &amp;sect; 212, HR 1586 (2010).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;The new provision applies to covered asset acquisitions occurring after December 31, 2010. The term "covered asset acquisitions" includes: (i) stock acquisitions for which an election under &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a jquery1304338579556="6" href="http://w3.lexis.com/research2/tax/irclinkhandler</description><author>RufusRhoadesAlexeyManasuev@placeholder.com (Rufus v. Rhoades &amp; Alexey Manasuev )</author><pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 08:22:00 -0400</pubDate></item></channel></rss>