NWCDN Members regularly post articles and summary judgements in workers’ compensations law in your state.
Select a state from the dropdown menu below to scroll through the state specific archives for updates and opinions on various workers’ compensation laws in your state.
Contact information for NWCDN members is also located on the state specific links in the event you have additional questions or your company is seeking a workers’ compensation lawyer in your state.
Earlier this month, we
at SLS experienced a first in appellate jurisprudence when our own Robert
Greenlaw was tasked with responding to an appeal in which the claimant
requested the Division Appeals Panel reverse a CCH Decision in his favor on issues
of extent of injury, MMI, impairment rating and disability. Yes, you read
that correctly – despite the fact that the Carrier had accepted all conditions
previously in dispute, and the fact that the designated doctor and post-DD RME
doctor agreed (as did the Carrier) that the claimant reached MMI on the
statutory date, rather than an earlier clinical date – the claimant insisted on
a CCH. Not surprisingly – at least to the Carrier – the ALJ found that
all of the claimed conditions were compensable, pushed the MMI date out to the
latest dated allowable by law, assigned the impairment rating agreed upon by
both the designated doctor and the RME doctor, and awarded almost 10 months of
disability.
Incredibly, for reasons known only to the Claimant, he asked the Appeals Panel
to reverse that decision. As Mr. Greenlaw pointed out in his response to
this novel appeal, the claimant expended extraordinary efforts throughout the
life of his claim in complaints about his adjusters, doctors, ombudsmen and, of
course, the Carrier’s attorney. While the Carrier did not appeal the
D&O, Rob found himself agreeing with the claimant on appeal and joining in
his request that the Appeals Panel reverse the CCH D&O in his favor on all
of the issues.
Copyright 2022, Stone Loughlin & Swanson, LLP