Most employers are aware of the concept of subrogation. California Labor Code §3852 specifically allows employers to seek recovery against third parties for reimbursement of workers’ compensation benefits paid due to an industrial injury attributed to third party negligence. Specifically, LC §3852 states: “Any employer who pays, or becomes obligated to pay compensation, or who …
Subrogation Waivers: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
Today’s blog discusses witness testimony at the Appeals Board, particularly testimony offered when compensability of an industrial injury is in dispute. More frequently than one might anticipate, an employer is caught by surprise when their own witness completely changes their story on the witness stand. Employers naturally feel duped when this occurs and can’t understand …
Beware Your Own Witness: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
When dealing with a catastrophic injury it is not unusual for a claims administrator to hire a home health care attendant to look after the injured worker. Some severely injured workers require constant care and cannot be left alone. For the most part, claims administrators have no objection to engaging a medical management company to …
Home Health Care Attendant: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
In death benefit claims dependency is a threshold issue, and when paternity is uncertain, it can be a major one. For example: we are aware of a case where a decedent’s ex-girlfriend sought death benefits on behalf of her minor child. DNA testing became necessary as the child’s birth certificate was deemed inadequate proof of paternity. …
DNA Evidence in Work Comp: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
Without a doubt, it is a major error whenever a claims professional stipulates to an injured workers’ Average Weekly Wage (AWW) being “maximum”, even though maximum earnings may exist. The AWW should always be identified as a specific dollar figure instead of taking a shortcut by stating “maximum.” The reason is quite simple. Although the injured …
When a fatality claim is filed, the claims administrator’s best practice is to immediately investigate the circumstances of both death and dependency. Often, the only dependent of the decedent is the spouse. For the sake of this blog let us presume that a deceased worker is survived only by a fully dependent wife. The decedent …
Investigating Dependency: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
Most claims professionals are aware that LC §4658.7(g) forbids settlement of a Supplemental Job Displacement Benefit (SJDB) voucher for an admitted industrial injury occurring on or after 1/1/2013. There is however, one exception. Namely, when an affirmative defense is raised, where if litigated the employee may “take nothing,” including the voucher. The purpose of today’s …
Voucher Eligibility: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
Although it may be difficult to believe, there is a definite home-field advantage in workers’ compensation when it comes to litigating claims at certain Appeals Board district offices. When a judge interacts with a particular attorney every day, there is a natural tendency to favor a familiar face over an attorney who is a stranger, …
WCAB Venue: A Sixty-Second Seminar in Workers’ Compensation Claims HandlingRead More
“Take Nothing!” This is often a magical phrase to an employer, administrator, and defense attorney. The phrase means that an applicant has lost at trial at the appeals board and was awarded no workers’ compensation benefits. In practice, “Take Nothing” orders are very rare, to the tune that only 1 in 750 cases that go …
