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...
Reversing a decision by a federal district court sitting in California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the California Insurance Guarantee Association (“CIGA”) need not reimburse Medicare for conditional payments Medicare had expended on behalf of various individuals whose workers’ compensation benefits CIGA was administering. The Court reasoned that CIGA was not a “workmen’s compensation law or plan” as contemplated by Medicare’s secondary payer provisions. CIGA was not a “primary plan,” but rather was a creature of insurance coverage, which was within the province of the states to regulate.
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 California Ins. Guar. Ass’n v. Azar, 2019 U.S. App. 30339 (9th Cir. Oct. 10, 2019)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 102.04.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see