By Hon. Robert G. Rassp, Presiding Judge, WCAB Los Angeles, California Division of Workers’ Compensation Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this article are solely those of...
Oakland, CA – Migraine Drugs represented less than 1% of all prescriptions dispensed to California injured workers in 2023 but they consumed 4.7% of workers’ compensation drug payments, a nearly...
COMPLEX EMPLOYMENT ISSUES FOR CALIFORNIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION A new softbound supplement to Rassp & Herlick, California Workers’ Compensation Law 284 pages PIN #0006801214509 For...
By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Just when you thought the right of “due process” was on the brink of destruction, the legislature...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Over the past several decades California has implemented broad legislative...
The New York Workers’ Compensation Board appropriately refused to apportion liability for claimant’s asbestos-related disease despite some evidence that the claimant had exposure to asbestos at multiple employers over a long period of time. The appellate court noted that an X-ray taken in May 1999 revealed the presence of pleural plaque consistent with exposure to asbestos. At that time, claimant was employed by ABB Combustion Engineering. An X-ray taken during 1992 was normal, with no indication of pleural plaque. A medical expert opined that the latency period between the exposure to asbestos and the manifestation of a related disease would suggest that the clear majority of the causal factors for the pleural plaques were significantly before 1999. While the expert indicated that apportionment was appropriate, the court noted that the expert had spoken only in terms of exposure; the expert admitted that determining claimant’s exposure to asbestos at each employer was impossible. The appellate court concluded that since there was no objective proof in the record that claimant contracted pleural plaque while working for another employer, the Board’s decision not to apportion the claim was supported by substantial evidence and would not be disturbed.
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 Advance.
See Matter of Manocchio v ABB Combustion Eng’g, 2017 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3509 (3rd Dept., May 4, 2017)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, §§ 153.02, 153.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law