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...
The provision in Ohio law [Ohio Rev. Code § 4123.90] prohibits an employer from terminating a worker who files a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, the statute does not apply where the claim was filed regarding a prioremployer. Thus, where an employee sustained injuries in 2014, while working for one employer and then, in 2016, took a job at a second employer, that second employer could not be sued for retaliatory discharge where the employee suffered no injury while working for the second employer and indeed admitted that she had never contemplated filing any claim against it.
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 McGree v. Gateway Healthcare Ctr., 2019-Ohio-988, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 1030 (Mar. 21, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 104.07.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see