LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Texas Appeals Panel Decision No. 100130 - Waiver

By Stuart D. Colburn, Shareholder, Downs Stanford In Appeals Panel Decision No. 100130, t he carrier received written notice of the claimed injury on June 19, 2009. Benefits were not initiated until July 10, 2009, more than 15 days later. Within 60 days of receiving notice, the carrier filed a denial...

California: Privilege Issues In Workers’ Compensation Cases

Your Protections Generally speaking there is very little that is not discoverable by a party to a litigated California Workers’ Compensation case. The theory is that open discovery with “all cards on the table” for both sides will promote more agreements and less litigation. Open...

God Bless the Broken Road: Delaware IAB Rules on Major Issue of Procedure in UR

Waiver anyone? This week's post features two cases on what I consider to be a huge procedural development in UR. A huge thank you to my friends at Tybout, Redfearn & Pell (especially Rob Greenberg and Nick Krayer) for their help in flagging the fact that there are now two rulings on this critical...

Severance Agreement Waiving Workers’ Comp Benefits Not Valid: Cal. Comp. Cases November Advanced Postings (11/10/2011)

Featured Case of the Week: Severance Agreement Waiving Workers' Comp Benefits Not Valid Sompo Japan Insurance Company of America (formerly known as Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company, c/o Broadspire, a Crawford Co.), insurer for Canon Business Solutions, Inc., Petitioner v. Workers'...

California: Does the WCAB’s Application of Equitable Principles Preclude a Predictable Outcome?

Lexis.com subscribers can link to the cases and statutes cited below. Almost 100 years ago, our Legislature was directed to “create and enforce a liability on the part of all employers to compensate their employees for any injury incurred by the said employees in the course of their employment...

Insurer Entitled to Credit for Third Party Recovery in Porta-Potty Injury Case: Cal. Comp. Cases May Advanced Postings (5/12/12)

Here’s the next batch of advanced postings for the May 2012 issue of Cal. Comp. Cases. Lexis.com subscribers can link to the cases to read the complete headnotes and summaries. © Copyright 2012 LexisNexis. All rights reserved. Pedro Gonzalez, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals...

California: The Element of Surprise as an Ex Parte Communication

Attorneys cannot surprise the other side and show “information” (films or vocational reports) to the AME at cross-examination as it is an ex-parte communication in violation of Labor Code section 4062.3 because the parties must agree on what “information” is to be provided to...

Larson’s Spotlight on Recent Cases: No Waiver of Benefits by Quitting Job That Offered Light Duty Work

Larson's Spotlight on Waiver of Benefits, Intervention, Psychiatric Claim, and Borrowed Employee. 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. ...

Massachusetts: Between Insurers, Payment of Benefits Is No Waiver of Right to Contest Coverage

A Massachusetts appellate court held that an insurer's assumption of payment does not purport to constitute a waiver of its right to contest coverage with respect to another insurer. Accordingly, where the first insurer initially evaluated the matter as a recurrence claim and paid benefits, that...

California: The Applicant’s Attorney's Right to a 5814.5 Fee

The WCAB explains why a 5814.5 fee should be awarded where a 5814 penalty is found In Juarez v. Watkins Manufacturing Corporation, 2014 Cal. Wrk. Comp. P.D. LEXIS --, the WCAB, having previously issued a Notice of Intention (NIT) to award attorney’s fees [see Juarez v. Watkins Manufacturing...

Pennsylvania: Waiver of Future Subrogation Rights Must Be Clear and Explicit

Where the employer joined into a third-party settlement agreement that stated the employer agreed to a payment of a sum certain “in full satisfaction of the defendant/employer’s (and its workers’ compensation insurance carrier’s) right to subrogate against the third party settlement...

New York: Claimant Entitled to Approval Nunc Pro Tunc Where Inactivity on Part of Insurer Lulled Claimant Into Believing Carrier’s Lien Had Been Waived

Where an injured worker settled a third-party action against an alleged tortfeasor for $800,000, with the workers’ compensation insurer having previously paid some $71,000 in benefits, the worker was entitled to an order approving a settlement of the tort claim nunc pro tunc under N.Y. Workers’...

Mississippi: General Contractor Waives Exclusive Remedy Defense by Waiting 26 Months Before Filing Summary Judgment Motion

The Supreme Court of Mississippi held that a general contractor waived its right to utilize the exclusive remedy defense where it was sued by the survivors of a worker employed by a subcontractor and for 26 months, it actively participated in litigating the merits of the case by joining various motions...

California: Rules for Hearing Representatives

It is common in the workers’ comp world for non-attorney representatives to perform a multitude of legal tasks, such as preparing documents, researching issues and communicating with clients. These non-attorney employees are often referred to as “hearing representatives.” They perform...

Have Yourself a Merry Little Waiver: Referral of Medical Treatment for UR Concedes Causation in Delaware

It is very fitting to feature a case involving UPS this time of year. I stumbled upon Paul Schneider v United Parcel Service , IAB#1283119 (12/1/15) and what makes this case a bit of a “re-gifting” is that it contains what most would think is a well-known and well established proposition...

Do You Know When Your Fee Petition Is Due? The Rocky Road Untimely Attorney’s Fee Petitions Travel

William Dorsey, Administrative Law Judge [fn1], Scott Hardy, Attorney Advisor, OALJ San Francisco A ttorney’s fees and costs often are available under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C.S. § 901 et seq.) to lawyers who successfully represent a “person...

New Jersey: Employment Contract Clause Limiting Statute of Limitations Is Ineffective Against Employee

In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of New Jersey, reversing a decision by the Superior Court, Appellate Division, held that a clause in an employer’s job application form that required any claim or lawsuit against the employer to be filed no more than six months after the date of...