CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES Vol. 89, No. 7 July 2024 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...
Havanis v. Calif. Dept. of Transportation (Board Panel Decision) By Hon. Colleen Casey, Former Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board I. Medical apportionment is not the...
By Robert G. Rassp, author of The Lawyer’s Guide to the AMA Guides and California Workers’ Compensation (LexisNexis) Disclaimer: The material and any opinions contained in this treatise are...
Oakland, CA – Private self-insured claim volume in the California workers' compensation system fell 9.5% in 2023, producing the biggest year-to-year decline in private self-insured claim frequency...
By Hon. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board No matter the source of your media consumption, it seems that the topic...
Where videotape surveillance indicated an injured employee was capable of activities that were substantially more strenuous than those that she told her treating physician that she was capable of performing, the Board was justified in finding the employee had violated N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 114-a, held a state appellate court. Moreover, there was substantial evidence supporting the Board’s decision not only to impose the mandatory penalty, but also the discretionary penalty disqualifying the employee from receiving future wage replacement benefits. The videotape showed claimant performing a variety of activities, including carrying lumber and a ladder, using a screw gun, climbing up and down the ladder and walking on a roof with a leaf blower. The appellate court held there was adequate evidence to support the Board’s finding that claimant overstated the extent of his disability when interacting with physicians for the purpose of influencing his workers’ compensation claim.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and 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 Peck v. The Donaldson Org., 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 607 (3d Dept. Feb. 4, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 39.03.
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.