Here's an interesting Board panel decision about a long-standing guardian ad litem who continued to represent the applicant after that party reached the age of majority. The WCAB said that the guardian...
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...
A decision by the New York Board that directed an injured worker to begin a weaning process from his long-term opioid prescription treatment program was supported by substantial evidence, held a state appellate court. The worker’s claim was established for an occupational disease of the back in 2003. He underwent surgery in 2005 and continued to seek medical treatment for chronic pain for many years thereafter. The employer’s carrier sought an order directing that claimant be weaned from opioid medications based upon the medical opinion of an IME, who conducted a pharmacological chart review of claimant’s medications and determined that weaning was appropriate based upon the Workers’ Compensation Board’s Non-Acute Pain Medical Treatment Guidelines (see 12 NYCRR 324.2[a]. The worker’s physician generally acknowledged those medical facts, but countered that the worker had been tolerant to a high dosage of opioids over a long period of time and he warned that weaning him could result in increased blood pressure and other medical problems. The court stressed that it was for the Board to resolve the conflict in medical opinion and it had done so.
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 Matter of Forte v. Muccini, 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1924 (3d Dept., Mar. 16, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 130.05.
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.