LexisNexis has selected some recently issued noteworthy IMR decisions that illustrate the criteria that must be met to obtain authorization for a variety of different medical treatment modalities. LexisNexis...
By Christopher Mahon, LexisNexis Legal Insights Contributing Author A September 2024 study from the Workers Compensation Research Institute indicates that workers represented by an attorney in workers’...
By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board “Substantial Medical Evidence” is a ubiquitous catch-all phrase. When does it exist? When...
CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 90, No. 1 January 2025 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. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Cases of “first impression” seldom wander into our workers’ compensation world. When...
Where an injured worker and his employer/carrier entered into settlement agreement, subsequently approved by a WCJ, calling for payment of $148,574.00 ($8,574.00 of which was to be placed in a Medicare Set-Aside Account) to the worker, and the worker subsequently filed a motion to amend the order of approval on the basis that due to his counsel's inadvertence, the WCJ's order did not include language that expressed the indemnity portion of the settlement in a monthly amount, as required by the Social Security Administration (so that the SSA could properly calculate any federal offset resulting from his simultaneous receipt of workers' compensation benefits and SSDI benefits, it was appropriate for the WCJ to modify the order, held a Louisiana appellate court. The Court acknowledged that while an approved agreement could ordinarily not be modified, here the rights of the employer/carrier were not being modified at all. The modification neither took away nor added anything to the original agreement. Practitioners should observe that the appellate court also awarded the worker’s counsel an additional $3,500 attorney’s fee for work performed on the appeal.
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 Clark v. Sedgwick CMS, 17-1063 (La. App. 3 Cir. 05/30/18), 2018 La. App. LEXIS 1074
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, §§ 132.06,157.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law