May 7, 2018 On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, making it harder for employers to classify workers as independent contractors in California’s growing gig economy. The Court seemed to scrap a more flexible classification test that had been used for decades in California (a multifactor test known as the Borello test) and adopted the so-called ABC test. The ABC test requires an employer […]
News & Knowledge
Category: Flash Bulletins
March 7, 2018 The Fourth District Court of Appeal has reestablished a semblance of rationality over how long an applicant can receive temporary disability in its published County of San Diego v. WCAB (Pike) decision issued on March 6, 2018. The Board had previously turned the 104 week temporary disability cap (Labor Code §4656 (c)(2)) on its head by ruling that a deputy sheriff who injured his right shoulder in July 2010 had the right to receive §4850 salary continuation […]
January 18, 2018 Ok, maybe not cheer but at least understand the latest dagger in the constitutional challenges of the state’s Independent Medical Review (IMR) process. California’s constitutional “plenary power” is a power that has been granted to a body, or person, in absolute terms, with no review of, or limitations upon the exercise of that power. The workers’ compensation reforms for 2013 included a method of allowing the injured worker, not the defendant, to challenge a determination of medical […]
April 27, 2017 When Senate Bill 899 (SB 899) was enacted in 2004, it sent shockwaves through the workers’ compensation system. As vocational rehabilitation went the way of the dinosaur, so too did a long-standing legal theory regarding causation and apportionment to preexisting conditions. Prior to SB 899, apportionment could not be based on causation. However, SB 899 changed that forever, opening the door for such decisions as Escobedo, the tenets of which are an integral part of the fabric […]
January 25, 2017 On January 23, 2017, the WCAB issued the en banc decision of Maxham v. Calif. Dept. of Corrections, clarifying the definition of “information” and “communication” in Labor Code §4062.3. The issue of communicating with agreed medical evaluators and panel qualified medical evaluators is governed by the timelines and rules in §4062.3. In the case of Maxham, defendants objected to applicant’s advocacy letters to three AMEs. Applicant sent the letters to the AMEs over defendants’ objections. Defendants filed […]
October 13, 2016 SB 863 dramatically changed how medical treatment is provided for work related injuries. Most importantly, it implemented Utilization Review (UR) and Independent Medical Review (IMR) as the primary arbitrators for the provision of medical treatment for admitted injuries. Applicant attorneys reacted to this by challenging UR decisions at a rate completely unanticipated by SB 863, and appealing many denials through IMR. SB 1160, signed into law by Governor Brown on 9/30/16, seeks to address concerns of both […]
August 16, 2016 For those carriers who were previously burdened by the vocational rehabilitation system in place for injured workers, the passage of Labor Code §4658.5 on 1/1/04, replacing that system with supplemental job displacement vouchers was a much heralded cost cutting event. Initially, parties were allowed to “settle out” this potential benefit owed to applicant. However, when SB 863 subsequently went into effect on 1/1/13, the Legislature denied parties the right to settle vouchers for injuries after that date. […]
August 16, 2016 For those carriers who were previously burdened by the vocational rehabilitation system in place for injured workers, the passage of Labor Code §4658.5 on 1/1/04, replacing that system with supplemental job displacement vouchers was a much heralded cost cutting event. Initially, parties were allowed to “settle out” this potential benefit owed to applicant. However, when SB 863 subsequently went into effect on 1/1/13, the Legislature denied parties the right to settle vouchers for injuries after that date. […]
June 23, 2016 On June 22, 2016, in the case of SCIF v. WCAB (Margaris), the Second District Court of Appeals finally resolved the ongoing dispute over the validity of IMR determinations issued beyond 30-days. The answer: the determinations are valid. The 30-day period is not a mandatory deadline. Recall that previously, the First District Court of Appeals in the Stevens case included dicta in its decision alluding to the fact that the IMR 30-day period is directory, not mandatory. […]