Five Recent Cases You Should Know About (7/4/2010)

Five Recent Cases You Should Know About (7/4/2010)

Larson’s Spotlight on Preferred Provider Organizations, Recreational Event, Mental-Mental Injuries, and Tactical Delays. Larson's surveys the latest case developments that you need to know about. Thomas A. Robinson, the staff writer for Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, has compiled the list below.

LA: Third District Court of Appeal Upholds $262 Million Award Against Multiple Preferred Provider Organizations

A Louisiana appellate court (3rd Dist.) affirmed a trial court’s partial summary judgment awarding class action plaintiffs—various medical care providers within the state—statutory damages of $262,048,000 ($2,000 per violation) against multiple Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs) for violations of the state’s Preferred Provider Organization Act (PPOA) (La. Rev. Stat. § 40:2201 et seq. and also affirmed a denial of defendants’ motions for summary judgment.  In its ruling, the appellate court agreed with the trial court that the prescriptive period for such violations is ten years and not one year, as defendants had maintained.  Plaintiffs had alleged that they had entered into standard PPO agreements with the defendants which allowed defendants’ clients/payors to pay a discounted rate for health care services, but that defendants had routinely reimbursed plaintiffs in workers’ compensation cases at the lower PPOA contracted rates, rather than the higher mandated workers’ compensation rates.  Plaintiffs successfully argued that the PPOA required defendants to provide prior notice of their intent to reimburse at PPO rates, either by providing the injured worker with a PPO card or by providing thirty days’ written notice of their intent to utilize an existing PPO agreement.

FREE VERSION: Access the case on lexisONE free case law. Click on tab for Free Case Law. Click on the radio button for Search by Citation. Enter this citation: 2010 La. App. LEXIS 988. Then click on the red button Search for Free. Note: If you haven’t registered for free at lexisONE, you will be prompted to do so in order to access the free case law.

FULLY FEATURED VERSION: Lexis.com subscribers can read the fully featured case here. See generally Larson's Workers' Compensation Law, § 94.02.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN lexisONE AND LexisNexis? Compare the differences between lexisONE free case law and LexisNexis fully featured case law to see what you get with each service.

CT: Exercise Walk on Employer's Property During Unpaid Lunch Held Not Compensable

The Supreme Court of Connecticut recently dismissed the appeal of a worker who sustained injuries while exercise walking on the employer's property during an unpaid lunch break.  In doing so, the state's high court let stand a ruling that the the major purpose of the worker's activity was recreational and, therefore, precluded from recovery by the provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-275..

FREE VERSION: Access the case on lexisONE free case law. Click on tab for Free Case Law. Click on the radio button for Search by Citation. Enter this citation: 2010 Conn. LEXIS 218. Then click on the red button Search for Free. Note: If you haven’t registered for free at lexisONE, you will be prompted to do so in order to access the free case law.

FULLY FEATURED VERSION: Lexis.com subscribers can read the fully featured case here. See generally Larson's Workers' Compensation Law, § 22.03.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN lexisONE AND LexisNexis? Compare the differences between lexisONE free case law and LexisNexis fully featured case law to see what you get with each service.

DC: "Mental-Mental" Claim That Arose From Employer's Confrontation over Alcohol Use Fails

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has affirmed the denial of benefits to a worker who claimed he sustained psychological injuries as a result of an incident in which various superiors confronted him about his alleged intoxication on the job, drove him around for some five hours in the early morning as they tried to find a medical facility that could perform a drug and alcohol test, eventually driving back to the employer's headquarters where an alcohol test indicated the worker had in fact been drinking.

FREE VERSION: Access the case on lexisONE free case law. Click on tab for Free Case Law. Click on the radio button for Search by Citation. Enter this citation: 2010 D.C. App. LEXIS 348. Then click on the red button Search for Free. Note: If you haven’t registered for free at lexisONE, you will be prompted to do so in order to access the free case law.

FULLY FEATURED VERSION: Lexis.com subscribers can read the fully featured case here. See generally Larson's Workers' Compensation Law, § 56.04.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN lexisONE AND LexisNexis? Compare the differences between lexisONE free case law and LexisNexis fully featured case law to see what you get with each service.

GA: Widow of Slain Deputy May Not Maintain Tort Action Against Sheriff and Other County Officials

A Georgia appellate court recently held that a county sheriff was the "employer" of a deputy who was shot and killed in a Georgia courthouse by an escaping convict; the widow's tort action against the sheriff, eight deputies, and various other county officials was accordingly barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the state's workers' compensation act.

FREE VERSION: Access the case on lexisONE free case law. Click on tab for Free Case Law. Click on the radio button for Search by Citation. Enter this citation: 2010 Ky. LEXIS 147. Then click on the red button Search for Free. Note: If you haven’t registered for free at lexisONE, you will be prompted to do so in order to access the free case law.

FULLY FEATURED VERSION: Lexis.com subscribers can read the fully featured case here. See generally Larson's Workers' Compensation Law, § 101.02.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN lexisONE AND LexisNexis? Compare the differences between lexisONE free case law and LexisNexis fully featured case law to see what you get with each service.

NJ: Attorney’s Tactical Delay, Coupled With His Serious Illness, Spells Doom for Reinstatement of Workers’ Compensation Claim

In an unpublished decision, a New Jersey appellate court, on June 30th, ruled that a motion to reinstate four workers’ compensation petitions was untimely filed where the injured worker’s petitions had been dismissed by the compensation court for lack of prosecution and the worker’s attorney purposefully delayed filing the motion for reinstatement until near the end of the one-year deadline for doing so, but the attorney suddenly became seriously ill and did not file the motion in time.

FREE VERSION: Access the case on lexisONE free case law. Click on tab for Free Case Law. Click on the radio button for Search by Citation. Enter this citation: 2010 Ky. LEXIS 147. Then click on the red button Search for Free. Note: If you haven’t registered for free at lexisONE, you will be prompted to do so in order to access the free case law.

FULLY FEATURED VERSION: Lexis.com subscribers can read the fully featured case here. See generally Larson's Workers' Compensation Law, § 124.08.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN lexisONE AND LexisNexis? Compare the differences between lexisONE free case law and LexisNexis fully featured case law to see what you get with each service.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law

 Offer good through 12/31/2010.