Publications
Appellate Division finds no reason to disturb employer’s experts’ qualifications, to not accept their testimony, and rejects claim that experts only offered net opinions. Appellate Division found that experts provided the reasons for their conclusions.
The pro se petitioner appealed from a workers’ compensation order finding that his injuries were not causally related to his employment. The petitioner filed two claims, both seeking medical and temporary benefits from the respondent.
Act 111 is not an unconstitutional special law regulating labor, and an IRE physician’s evaluation is competent to support a modification of benefits despite not considering the most recent medical records and diagnostic studies.
The claimant underwent an Impairment Rating Evaluation (IRE) on September 20, 2011, following a July 5, 2005, work injury.
Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board violates long-standing workers’ compensation principles by overturning credibility findings made by a worker’s compensation judge.
The claimant suffered a work injury to her right thumb in the nature of a strain/sprain.
What’s Hot In Workers’ Comp - News and Results*
NEWS
RESULTS*
Tony Natale (Philadelphia, PA):
Delaware Supreme Court affirms IAB decision and rejects employer’s arguments that Superior Court Civil Rule 41(a)(1) and the doctrine of collateral estoppel barred claimant from filing a petition for a recurrence of total disability benefits.
The claimant was injured in a work accident on October 28, 2018. On December 9, 2019, he filed a Petition to Determine Additional Compensation Due that sought total disability benefits (TTD) and two surgeries, including a spine surgery.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Claimant attorney’s appeal of judge of compensation claims’ order denying a statutory fee on settlement overturned by First District Court of Appeal and held to be reasonable.
This case involves a complex 1993 date of accident and a claimant who is a ventilator-dependent quadriplegic. Prior to being represented by Michael Rudolph, the claimant had five other attorneys.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Appellate Division affirmed workers’ compensation order finding an increase in permanency, but not total disability.
In this case, the Appellate Division affirmed the workers’ compensation order for an increase in the petitioner’s permanency award but denied his claim that he was permanently and totally disabled.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Injuries sustained by a claimant while commuting were not compensable under the Act as the claimant was not a traveling employee with no fixed place of work.
The claimant worked as a crew leader for the employer’s tree-trimming business. On October 1, 2021, while driving home in his personal vehicle at the end of the workday, the claimant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
What’s Hot In Workers’ Comp - News and Results*
NEWS
RESULTS*
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Delaware Superior Court affirms an Industrial Accident Board decision that a claimant injured while performing an employer-related volunteer activity was not within the course and scope of employment.
Ms. Testa-Carr worked as a customer service representative for Sallie Mae. On March 21, 2022, she was fell down some stairs and was injured while delivering Meals on Wheels to an apartment in Newark.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.