Total Articles: 11
Goldberg Segalla LLP • September 01, 2016
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court issued a published decision on August 24, 2016 confirming the right of workers’ compensation insurers to recover medical expenses from the proceeds of any recovery the worker obtains from a third-party tortfeasor under Section 40 of the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act. The decision in Lambert v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of America offers welcome clarity concerning reimbursement of medical payments under Section 40 (see No. A-1073-14T3, __ N.J. Super. __, __ (App. Div. 2016)).
Goldberg Segalla LLP • October 26, 2015
The New York Workers’ Compensation Board has implemented a new procedure that changes the way carriers manage claims per Section 25(2)(a), which will affect both carriers and employers. The new procedure requires carriers to accept or controvert a claim “within 18 days after a disability or within 10 days after the employer has knowledge of the alleged accident, whichever is greater.”
Goldberg Segalla LLP • June 17, 2015
Timely summaries of decisions from across New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania concerning workers' compensation matters. It also provides the latest news regarding litigation, changes in interpretive language used by the courts, permanency determinations, and more.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • October 09, 2014
Timely summaries of decisions from across New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey concerning workers' compensation matters. It also provides the latest news regarding litigation, changes in interpretive language used by the courts, permanency determinations, and more.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • June 23, 2014
Timely summaries of decisions from across New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey concerning workers'compensation matters. It also provides the latest news regarding litigation, changes in interpretive language used by the courts, permanency determinations, and more.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • October 11, 2013
In the coming months, the Workers' Compensation Board is phasing in its new eClaims system, which will greatly impact the manner in which carriers file denials on new claims. To help streamline the process and maintain all applicable defenses to new claims, the following is our recommended procedure for controverting claims.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • July 02, 2013
In an extremely rare decision, the New York State Court of Appeals has granted reargument. In Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. Partnership, the court granted reargument of its prior ruling that granted the defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiffs from litigating the issue of the injured plaintiff’s accident-related disability based upon a prior ruling by the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB).
Goldberg Segalla LLP • March 29, 2013
In a recent decision with profound implications for defending workers’ compensation claims in New York, the Court of Appeals reversed the First Department and held that the doctrine of collateral estoppel bars a plaintiff from litigating duration of disability in New York State Supreme Court when the plaintiff previously litigated the same issue to a full and final decision as a claimant in a corresponding matter before the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB).
Goldberg Segalla LLP • February 05, 2013
In a rare twist, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s recent proposed changes to workers’ compensation in New York have earned praise from both the business side and the labor side.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • October 23, 2012
In New York Workers’ Compensation Case No. 00427749, the claimant, a driver, sustained injuries to her back, neck, right shoulder, face, and right thumb when she was rear-ended by a van in 2004. In addition to underscoring the requirements a claimant must meet to be classified with a permanent total disability, the proceedings that ensued in this case provide carriers and employers with an important defense against claimants’ physicians who do not properly investigate the true capabilities and daily lives of claimants.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • October 23, 2012
Cases from across New York’s court system.