.png)
Publications
First District Court of Appeal holds that judge erred in applying the reverse presumption provision to heart disease case.
The claimant was hired and worked in corrections in 2004 before being transferred to patrol in 2005. In January and December 2004, he had pre-employment physicals which revealed no evidence of hypertension or heart disease at that time.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
Appellate Division determines it is an abuse of discretion to enter an order for sanctions without permitting counsel to be heard and without specific findings as to why a settlement payment was unreasonably delayed.
The petitioner filed a workers’ compensation case in January 2009 that was ultimately resolved through an order approving settlement for partial total disability.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
When a claimant prevails in a termination petition, her litigation costs are reimbursable, even where the the testimony of her medical expert is found to be not credible by the court.
The claimant sustained a work injury on October 4, 2018, in the nature of a left hand strain. She returned to work and began receiving partial disability benefits pursuant to a Notice of Suspension or Modification.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
Although he signed an independent contractor agreement, claimant was an employee at the time of the work injury, primarily due to significant control exercised by the employer through its ownership of the truck and payments made by the mile.
The claimant, a truck driver, filed a claim petition for a work-related left wrist injury. He later filed a petition against the Uninsured Employer’s Guaranty Fund (UEGF).
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
What's Hot in Workers' Comp - News and Results*
NEWS
RESULTS*
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
Board denies petition for increased infusion treatment bills under theory that Delaware Fee Schedule did not apply; Board should order payment of “reasonable cost” of treatment. Board held that treatment in accordance with §2322B(7) was correctly paid.
Ms.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp
An employer/carrier cannot hide behind a “wall of willful ignorance” to avoid providing attendant care benefits when the written prescription is not specific.
The claimant in this matter appealed the judge’s denial of attendant care.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
The Appellate Division affirms its decision to include attorneys’ fees and costs in a workers’ compensation claim in a Section 40 lien.
The Appellate Division reviewed a remanded case for reconsideration by the Supreme Court after
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
Absent fraud, deception, duress, mutual mistake or unilateral mistake caused by the opposing party, a Compromise and Release Agreement cannot be set aside.
The claimant filed a claim petition pro se, alleging he sustained a work-related traumatic hearing los
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.
Where employer issues MONCP after NTCP, issuance of Notice of Denial and NSTC is not required and employer not estopped from seeking termination of benefits as of date that precedes the date the MONCP payable is issued.
The claimant sustained an injury to her head when a metal gate crashed down on top of her.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 26, No.