In an apparent case of first impression, a Board panel granted an applicant’s petition to modify the terms in a previously approved Compromise and Release (C&R), to allow a change in the administration...
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...
In a sharply divided decision, a Pennsylvania appellate court held that the statutory provision in § 306(a.2) of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act that requires physicians to utilize “the most recent” edition of the AMA’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in determining the level of an injured employee’s permanent impairment is an improper delegation of legislative authority and, accordingly, is unconstitutional. The majority noted that in 1996, when the statute was modified to require the use of the AMA Guides, 4th Edition, the Legislature had examined the Guides and determined that it conformed with public policy. Adopting subsequent editions as the standard, without an examination and determination that they were consistent with the state’s interests was improper, however. The majority noted that the Legislature could delegate authority and discretion in connection with the execution and administration of a law to an independent agency or an executive branch agency where it had first established primary standards and imposed upon others the duty to carry out its declared legislative policy. Section 306(a.2) went too far, however. It provided a private party—the AMA—with carte blanche authority to implement its own policies and standards and then required the state to adopt them sight unseen.
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. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.
See Protz v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Derry Area Sch. Dist.), 2015 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 404 (Sept. 18, 2015) [2015 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 404 (Sept. 18, 2015)]
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 80.07 [80.07]
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see http://www.workcompwriter.com/pa-court-strikes-down-use-of-ama-guides–6th-ed/
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site