Publications
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.
Judges of compensation claims have the authority to take a flexible and holistic approach to permanent total disability claims as the triers of fact. The Blake methods are guidelines, not requirements.
The employer/carrier in this matter appealed the judge of compensation claims’ award of permanent total disability (PTD) benefits.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Appellate Divisions affirms a workers’ compensation judge’s decision that the claimant’s testimony was not credible and his medical expert’s theory was not supported by objective evidence.
The Appellate Division affirmed the workers’ compensation order denying the petitioner’s motion for medical/temporary benefits.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Appellate Division confirms that the trial judge correctly applied the intentional-wrong exception to the insurer’s policy.
The Appellate Division affirmed the Law Division order granting Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co.’s motion to dismiss and denying Sir Electric, LLC’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board did not err in granting employer’s petition for a de novo hearing to present after-discovered evidence of a medical provider’s prohibited self-referral to a pharmacy that a workers’ compensation judge would not allow.
The claimant settled a 2010 work injury by Compromise and Release Agreement (C&R) in 2017. The C&R stated the employer reserved the right to either continue paying medical benefits or to fund a Medicare Set-Aside (MSA).
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Although claimant cannot be working with a concurrent employer on date of work injury with another employer, the relationship with the concurrent employer was sufficiently intact that concurrent wages must be included in calculating average weekly wage.
The claimant sustained an injury on December 29, 2018, while working as a home health aide. The claim was accepted by the employer, and the claimant began receiving benefits at the rate of $468 per week, based on an average weekly wage of $520.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
Bureau directed to identify and publish in Pennsylvania Bulletin a different, nationally recognized schedule for valuing pharmaceuticals.
A Fee Review Hearing Officer ordered the carrier/petitioner to pay Summit Pharmacy approximately $72,500 as reimbursement for generic drugs provided to the claimant for her work injuries.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.
What’s Hot In Workers’ Comp - News and Results*
NEWS
We are pleased to announce that Erykah L. Jackson has joined our Florida workers’ compensation team! Learn more about Erykah here.
RESULTS*
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 28, No.