Oakland – A new California Workers’ Compensation Institute (CWCI) study finds that average paid losses on California workers’ compensation lost-time claims fell immediately after legislative...
By Thomas A. Robinson, Co-Editor-in-Chief, Workers’ Compensation Emerging Issues Analysis (LexisNexis) As we move through the third decade of the twenty-first century, the United States remains...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Industrially injured workers in California are entitled to receive...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 88, No. 9 September 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 It is well-settled law that federally recognized Indian Tribes have...
Noting the considerable deference allowed to the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board when it comes to reconciling any differences in medical evidence, the Supreme Court of Alaska affirmed a decision that denied a former employee’s claim for additional benefits where substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that the employee’s work-related injuries were not the substantial cause of her disability or need for medical treatment [see Alas. Stat. § 23.30.010(a)]. The employee contended that she suffered injuries to her knees when on two separate occasions a filing cabinet tipped over and struck her. Medical evidence tended to show, however, that the employee’s main medical issue was arthritis, that MRIs before and after the two accidents were virtually identical, and that the employee had a “tendency to convert stress to somatic symptoms.” A chiropractor released the employee to work without restrictions less than a week after the second incident. A separate physician also indicated the employee was “heavily invested in her symptoms to the point of invalidism.” The Court concluded that ample evidence supported the Board’s findings
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
See Buchinsky v. The Arc of Anchorage & Seabright Ins. Co., 2016 Alas. LEXIS 70 (May 25, 2016).
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 130.05.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.