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...
Affirming a November 2020 decision by a lower appellate court, the Supreme Court of Ohio held the state Industrial Commission was within its powers when it rejected a proposed settlement agreement executed by representatives of an employer and an injured employee that purported to dispose of the employee’s violation of specific safety requirements (VSSR) claim. The high court agreed that the Commission had broad discretion in approving such agreements. Its discretion allowed it to judge whether the settlement was fair and equitable. The employer had contended that the statute only allowed the Commission to examine the form of the agreement, that the parties should be free to come to their own bargain. The court noted that prior to the settlement, the Commission had sent the parties a letter indicating the award would probably range between $21,000 and $70,000. Under those circumstances, the Commission was within its power to refuse a settlement for a lump-sum payment of $2,000.
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 State ex rel. Zarbana Indus. v. Indus. Comm’n of Ohio, 2021-Ohio-3669, 2021 Ohio LEXIS 2073 (Oct. 19, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 105.06.
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.