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 a father and son operated a farm business as a partnership, securing workers’ compensation insurance through the State Insurance Fund (“SIF”), the subsequent withdrawal of the father from the partnership, with the son’s continuance in the business, did not violate the policy in such a fashion as to make the business uninsured, held a New York appellate court. The only stated consequence of failing to apprise SIF of a change in ownership was a potential change in the amount of the premium due. Accordingly, where the decedent, a 14-year-old boy, was killed in a farming accident, a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board that the employer was insured and an award of death benefits [doubled because of the double indemnity provision for the illegal employment of a minor language in N.Y. Work. Comp. Law § 14-a(1)] was appropriate, in spite of the mother’s contention that the employer was uninsured.
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 Smith v Park, 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3535 (3rd Dept. May 17, 2018)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, §§ 102.02,150.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law