|
|
|
Find Solutions & Strategies March 29, 2010 |
|
The Key to Getting Stips Approved |
Parties must comply with return to work matters |
|
A Note From the Editor |
 |
Dear WC Professionals:
Our migration to a new website for the LexisNexis Workers' Comp Law Community was completed last Thursday. In the coming months you'll see enhancements and new features added to the site. We look forward to hearing your feedback & suggestions.
Sincerely,
Robin E. Kobayashi, J.D.
LexisNexis Editorial & Content Development
|
How to Enter Our Raffle for California E-Disovery Book |
 |
Purchase our 22-Year CD-ROM Archive of Workers' Comp Laws of Calif at *50% Off
and be eligible to win our new Calif. E-Discovery book
You must contact me first to obtain a promotional code for the CD-ROM archive at:
*Discount price is $51.50 plus tax, shipping & handling |
Web Poll in Progress |
How will health care reform impact workers' comp?
|
| |
featured article: stipulations |
Judge Colleen Casey writes that one of the most common errors parties encounter when submitting Stipulations with Request for Award is failing to comply with 8 CCR § 10117, which is the regulation for handling "Return to Work" matters. Read the article.
|
recent panel decisions - sneak preview |
Check out these recent panel decisions that we're considering for the LexisNexis® services:
Vocational Rehabilitation; Repeal of Labor Code § 139.5; Reinstatement of Services. WCAB held that applicant was entitled to VR services from 3/6/2007, but not from 11/29/2006, when applicant's VR rights were vested prior to 1/1/2009 as required under Weiner v. Ralph's Company since 10/17/2008 decision upholding award of VR benefits became final after time to appeal expired, applicant interrupted services and never requested reinstatement pursuant to defendant's instructions, and applicant's listing "Rehabilitation" as issue on 11/29/2006 DOR did not sufficiently comply with former Rule 10129 so as to constitute request for services, and applicant properly demanded VR for first time after interruption on 3/6/2007. See Brown panel decision
Dismissal; Application for Adjudication; Alternative Dispute Resolution. WCAB rescinded WCJ's order dismissing injured worker's Application alleging injury to multiple body parts, pursuant to Labor Code § 3201.5, when (1) WCJ dismissed Application without making required evidentiary findings necessary to justify dismissal of claim based upon carve-out agreement, including finding that parties were subject to such an agreement at time of applicant's injury and that Administrative Director issued appropriate letter of eligibility in connection with collective bargaining agreement, and (2) WCJ failed to issue Notice of Intent prior to dismissing Application, in violation of applicant's due process rights. See Yamnitsky panel decision
Medical-Legal Procedure; Independent Medical Examiners; Communications. WCAB held that reporting of "regular physician" appointed by WCJ pursuant to Labor Code § 5701 to examine applicant must be stricken from evidentiary record because defendant, although acting in good faith, communicated directly with regular physician rather than corresponding with physician through WCAB as required under Rule 10718. See Oseguera panel decision |
 |
BLOG ROUND up |
Workers' Comp Fraud Blotter 3/25/2010 recent arrests, charges, convictions, investigations. Enforcement sweeps in Monterey County, Contractor sting operation in Kern County, Correctional officer accused of lying after being shot.
California Supreme Court to Review COLA Calculation Case. Richard Jacobsmeyer writes about the Supreme Court's order granting the DWC's Petition for Hearing in Duncan v W.C.A.B., which involves the calculation of the COLA increases in life pension and permanent total disability cases.
|
national workers' comp enewsletter |
We've launched a free national workers' compensation eNewlsetter this week. If you need to keep abreast of workers' comp developments in other states, this weekly eNewsletter is for you. Email me at Robin.E.Kobayashi@lexisnexis.com to be added to the distribution list. Be sure to say you want the National enewsletter and provide your first and last name and email address. | |
 |
 |
CALIFORNIA TOP CASES |
> Barba v. Wal-Mart Transportation (third party actions; reimbursement) |
50% Off larson's |
For the first time ever, get 50% off Larson's.
Larson's Workers' Compensation Law (12 vols.) order here
Larson's Workers' Compensation, Desk Edition (3 vols.) order here
Offer good through April 2010. |
LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used under license. Other products or services may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
Privacy & Security Copyright © 2010 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|