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...
Where an Ohio worker sustained partial amputation of three fingers on his left hand in an industrial accident, leaving him with a fully functioning thumb and index finger on that hand, he was not entitled to an award for total loss of use of his hand, held a state appellate court. The court acknowledged that under Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4123.57(B), where two or more fingers have been amputated and the nature of the employee’s work is such that the handicap or disability is greater than from the two fingers alone, the administrator can increase of the loss of use award beyond that for the fingers alone up to an award equal to the loss of the entire hand. The court stressed that since none of the worker’s fingers had been fully amputated and medical evidence indicated that the thumb and index fingers retained feeling and retained the ability to exert pressure, allowing items to be picked up by those digits, there had been no total loss of use of the hand.
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 State ex rel. Root v. Industrial Comm’n, 2017-Ohio–512, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 502 (Feb. 14, 2017)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 86.03.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law