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...
Testimony and medical reports prepared by two physicians were properly excluded by a New York WCLJ where the employer's carriers caused multiple subpoenas duces tecum to be served on the physicians and on multiple occasions, the doctors refused to make themselves available for depositions. The WCLJ continued the matter several times because of the difficulty in obtaining the depositions, but eventually proceeded without them. Claimant contended that because the carriers had not sought to enforce the subpoenas, it was not appropriate for the WCLJ to proceed without additional efforts to secure the testimony. The appellate court disagreed. It noted that the burden was upon the claimant to establish medical causation in her case. The carriers had not waived their right to cross-examine the doctors by failing to enforce the subpoenas.
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 DeLucia v. Greenbuild, LLC, 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2435 (3d Dept. Apr. 23, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 127.11.
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.