CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION CASES
Vol. 88, No. 5 May 2023
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. Susan V. Hamilton, Former Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
In 2022 there were 7,490 wildfires in California. They burned 362,455 acres...
By Christopher Mahon
Should temporary workers be treated separately under workers’ compensation law due to additional employment and income risks they may incur after workplace injuries? A new study...
Here's a noteworthy panel decision where a family member conveyed essential information to the AME on behalf of the injured employee. The Lexis headnote is below.
CA - NOTEWORTHY PANEL DECISIONS...
Oakland, CA – Part II of a California Workers’ Compensation Institute (CWCI) research series on low- volume/high-cost drugs used to treat California injured workers identifies three Dermatological drugs...
Building on an earlier decision in which the Ohio Supreme Court had determined that the Ohio contractor’s self-insurance plan [see Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4123.35(O)] provided immunity not only to the self-insuring general contractor, but also to enrolled subcontractors from tort claims brought by employees of other enrolled subcontractors [see Stolz I, 146 Ohio St.3d 281, 2016-Ohio-1567, 55 N.E.3d 1082, at ¶ 8], the state's high court found that the law does not violate right-to-remedy, right-to-jury, or equal-protection provisions of the Ohio Constitution.
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 Stolz v. J & B Steel Erectors, 2018-Ohio-5088, 2018 Ohio LEXIS 3011 (Dec. 20, 2018)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 111.04.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see