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...
Stressing that allowing a workers’ compensation insurer to intervene in a third-party civil action filed by an injured worker against the purported tortfeasor would not cause delay and would not necessarily cause confusion among potential jurors should the case ever go to trial, a federal district court allowed the requested intervention on discretionary grounds. The court observed that the insurer had not shown that it should be allowed to intervene as a matter of right but indicated further that since the case was still in its early stages and the insurer had apparently expended considerable sums in the underlying workers’ compensation claim, it had a sufficient interest in the civil action to warrant intervention, due to its subrogation rights under the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and 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 Henderson v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75730 (E.D. Mo. Apr. 20, 2021)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 116.05.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.