Substantial evidence supported a decision by New York’s Workers’ Compensation Board that denied benefits to a claims examiner who contended she suffered a shoulder injury in a work-related fall at her office where she waited 19 months before seeking...
A WCLJ’s decision to give no weight to medical opinions offered by two medical experts—an independent medical examiner and the deceased employee’s treating physician—because both experts had entered into significant ex parte contact with...
Where an employer’s examining physician opined that the workers’ compensation claimant had fully recovered from her injuries—the physician based his opinion, in large part, on the fact that claimant had not sought medical treatment from any physician...
A safety and security officer, who filed a claim seeking to recover workers’ compensation benefits for alleged Lyme disease almost six years after he filed a report with his employer indicating he had suffered two tick bites, failed to establish a causal...
A finding by New York’s Workers’ Compensation Board that surgery related to an injured employee’s back condition should not be approved was error, held a state appellate court, where the Board’s decision (affirming that of a WCLJ) was based...
Construing Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 101(3)(a)(I) and 101(3.7), pursuant to which impairment ratings in workers’ compensation claims must be “based on” the revised third edition of AMA Guides, a Colorado appellate court said that choice...
An award of benefits for an employee’s stress fracture in her right foot was appropriate, held a Mississippi appellate court, in spite of the fact that her physician had testified that the employee’s repetitive activity at work was a “possible”...
In Arkansas, a workers’ compensation claimant must ordinarily establish his or her injury claim with medical evidence “supported by objective findings” [see Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(D) (Supp. 2019)]. Acknowledging that requirement, a...
In a trial court proceeding following an employer's appeal of award of benefits awarded by the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, it was appropriate to instruct the jury on the so-called "eggshell" theory of medical causation since the employer...
The language in Kan. Stat. Ann. 2019 Supp. § 44-510e(a)(2)(B) requiring use of the 6th Edition of the American Medical Association's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment should reasonably be interpreted as a "guideline," and not a...
A New York appellate court held sufficient evidence supported the Board's determination that a worker's myocardial infarction was not causally connected to his employment, where the worker's expert opined that it was "possible" that claimant's...
Where claimant's physician testified that it was "difficult to determine" when claimant's meniscus tear occurred and that there was "a strong possibility" that something which happened at work could have exacerbated claimant's chronic...
In spite of the deference afforded West Virginia's Workers' Compensation Board of Review when it comes to fact-finding, the state's Supreme Court, in a memorandum decision, reversed the Board's decision that awarded benefits for a worker's bilateral...
Hawaii's presumption of compensability cannot be overcome merely by the employer's offer of evidence that some cause, other than the employment, was medically plausible in producing the injured worker's condition or illness, held the Supreme Court of...
Testimony and medical reports prepared by two physicians were properly excluded by a New York WCLJ where the employer's carriers caused multiple subpoenas duces tecum to be served on the physicians and on multiple occasions, the doctors refused to make themselves...