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...
A Pennsylvania appellate court held that while a psychologist may provide competent testimony in the claim petition context, if a claimant seeks to rebut competent impairment rating evaluation evidence, he or she must present evidence of similar character—i.e., evidence of rating evaluations performed only by those persons the General Assembly has deemed qualified to engage in rating evaluations—osteopathic or medical doctors. The court held the WCJ and Board erred, therefore, in concluding that the testimony of a non-medical expert (in this case a psychologist) regarding the rating of a claimant’s condition was competent for the purpose of rebutting the IRE evidence submitted by an employer. The court also disagreed with the WCJ’s conclusion that, because the AMA Guides anticipated that non-medical psychologists would consult and use the AMA Guides for diagnosis and treatment purposes, workers’ compensation judges could accept non-medical testimony to support a claimant’s position. The court stressed that the courts and the Board were constrained not by the terms of the AMA Guides, but rather by the Act and applicable regulations.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Commonwealth of Pa./DPW - Loysville Youth Center v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Slessler), 2014 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 519 (Oct. 30, 2014) [2014 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 519 (Oct. 30, 2014)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 130.05 [130.05]
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.