LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Thomas A. Robinson
Tennessee: Employer Saddled With 90 Percent of PTD Award Where Preexisting Condition Prevented Surgery

A trial court properly apportioned 10 percent of a permanently and totally disabled worker’s disability to the Second Injury Fund where it found that the worker sustained a 90 percent PPD as a result of a shoulder and arm injury, but also found...

Thomas A. Robinson
Georgia: Discharged Attorney Due $17,180 on Quantum Meruit Basis

Where Georgia’s State Board of Workers’ Compensation determined that a fee contract with an injured worker’s former counsel was unenforceable—the attorney was discharged before the final resolution of the case—it was nevertheless...

Thomas A. Robinson
Washington: Reopening Case Doomed Where No Objective Medical Evidence Indicated Worsening of Condition

A Washington appellate court affirmed the dismissal of an employee’s application to reopen her workers’ compensation claim, reiterating that under Wash. Rev. Code § 51.32.160(1)(a), the employee must not only show a worsening of her condition...

Christian Kerry
California: Labor Code §4660.1 Excludes Vocational Rehabilitation Evidence to Rebut the PDRS for Injuries Occurring On or After 1/1/13

By: Christian P. Kerry, Esq. Introduction Labor Code §4660.1 (a), by its express terms, applies to all injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2013. It provides in pertinent part that in determining the percentages of permanent partial or...

Mark Gearheart
California: Vocational Rehabilitation Evidence May Be Used to Rebut the PDRS For Post 2012 Injuries

By: Mark Gearheart © Copyright Mark Gearheart 2018 January 8, 2018 Introduction : Recently some have argued that vocational rehabilitation evidence cannot be used to rebut the Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (hereinafter referred...

LexisNexis Workers' Comp Law Newsroom Staff
California: What Constitutes a Prescription for Home Health Care Services?

Any information or opinions contained in this commentary are not necessarily endorsed by LexisNexis® or its affiliates or by the LexisNexis® editorial consultants who review panel decisions. Prior to 2013, there may not have been a more controversial...