Today is
Wednesday, April 24, 2024 -
News Articles
Thursday, December 13, 2018
Attorneys See Significant Ramifications From Lindh Decision
- State: California
- Topic: Top
- - Popular with: Legal
- - 4 shares
The latest California appellate court decision finding asymptomatic, pre-existing conditions are fai…
Purchase this story for only $7.99!
Add to CartFor access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.
Today’s News
- Calif. - DWC Launches Portal for QME Reports Top 04/24/24
- Ill. - Worker Not Entitled to Additional Benefits, Compensation for Other Alleged Injuries NORTH 04/24/24
- La. - Worker Gets Benefits for Foot Injury, Remains Entitled Despite Rejecting Job Offer SOUTH 04/24/24
- N.Y. - Worker Struck by Falling Objects Gets Summary Judgment on Labor Law Claim NORTH 04/24/24
- N.Y. - Court Upholds Partial Dismissal of Worker's Trip-and-Fall Claim NORTH 04/24/24
- Calif. - Appropriations Committee Places TD Bills on Suspense File WEST 04/24/24
- Hawaii - Lawmakers Pass Cancer Presumption Bill and Nurse Payment Resolution WEST 04/24/24
Advertisements
Now Trending
- Workers' Compensation News
-
Calif. Court
Upholds Summary Dismissal of
Worker's Claims for Retaliation,…
Posted on Apr 17, 2024
-
Calif. DWC Updates
Time-of-Hire…
Posted on Apr 23, 2024
-
Calif. WCIRB
Approves Recommendation for 0.9%
Rate…
Posted on Apr 18, 2024
-
Calif. Committee
Passes Bill to Expand 4850…
Posted on Apr 22, 2024
-
Calif. Committee
Passes Bill to Revise Poster…
Posted on Apr 19, 2024
-
Calif. Cal/OSHA
Cites Construction Company $371,100
for Fatal Trench…
Posted on Apr 22, 2024
-
Calif.
Appropriations Committee Schedules
Hearing on E-Signature…
Posted on Apr 22, 2024
-
Ore. Worker Can
Request Examination if Carrier
Supports Claim Denial With IME…
Posted on Apr 22, 2024
-
Minn. Supreme
Court Upholds Award to Social
Worker for…
Posted on Apr 19, 2024
-
Ark. Worker Not
Entitled to Additional Benefits
After Date of…
Posted on Apr 22, 2024
Jobs
Upcoming Events
May 5-8, 2024
Risk World
Amplify Your Impact There’s no limit to what you can achieve when you join the global risk managem …
May 13-15, 2024
NCCI's Annual Insights Symposi
Join us May 13–15, 2024, for NCCI's Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2024, the industry’s premier e …
May 13-14, 2024
CSIA Announces the 2024 Annual
The Board of Managers is excited to announce that the CSIA 2024 Annual Meeting and Educational Con …
Social Media Links
WorkCompCentral
c/o Business Insurance Holdings, Inc.
c/o Business Insurance Holdings, Inc.
PO Box 1010
Greenwich, CT 06836
(805) 484-0333
Greenwich, CT 06836
3 Comments
Log in to post a comment
Carol Powell Dec 13, 2018 a 7:12 pm PST
Another take away is that apportioning to causation of injury and apportioning to causation of permanent disability can be the SAME thing sometimes, just like the court said it was acceptable here.
Brad Wixen Dec 14, 2018 a 6:12 pm PST
Powell hit it exactly. The case does not change existing law. Apportioning to non disabling pathology remains legal. Apportioning to risk factors of injury remains illegal. This case shows that depending on how the issues are framed that sometimes they will be the same analysis.
Marko Vucurevic Dec 13, 2018 a 8:12 pm PST
I know it can become a circular argument, but has the question been considered of how much his previous job activities exacerbated the underlying vascular issue? If we're saying 85% of the blindness was from prior condition, can not the possible argument be made that degree of the underlying vascular condition has been affected by the historical affects of his employment. My guess is that this was not the first time he has had trauma in his job. Because he did not end up losing vision previous does not mean that those incidents didn't worsen the underlying vascular condition which should be taken into consideration when apportioning the disability.
Brad Wixen Dec 14, 2018 a 6:12 pm PST
Ms. Powell got it right. The case did not change the law. Apportioning to non disabling pathology remains legal. Apportioning to risk factors of injury remains illegal. The question is how it is framed. In this case the Court determined that the issues were identical.