CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES
Vol. 88, No. 5 May 2023
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. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
In 2022 there were 7,490 wildfires in California. They burned 362,455 acres...
By Christopher Mahon
Should temporary workers be treated separately under workers’ compensation law due to additional employment and income risks they may incur after workplace injuries? A new study...
Here's a noteworthy panel decision where a family member conveyed essential information to the AME on behalf of the injured employee. The Lexis headnote is below.
CA - NOTEWORTHY PANEL DECISIONS...
Oakland, CA – Part II of a California Workers’ Compensation Institute (CWCI) research series on low- volume/high-cost drugs used to treat California injured workers identifies three Dermatological drugs...
Quoting Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, and finding that in addition to an impairment to a worker’s arm, he also suffered from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, an Alabama court said it was error to limit the worker’s recovery to a 59 percent loss of the upper extremity. Noting that the treating physician had opined that the worker sustained a 59 percent loss of use to his arm, the physician also noted pain in the worker’s neck and the CRPS condition. It was improper, said the Court, under this scenario, to limit the worker to a scheduled award. The case was remanded to determine the full measure of the worker’s impairment.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and 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 Turner v. Robert J. Baggett, Inc., 2021 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 7 (Feb. 5, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 87.02.
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.