DECISION NUMBER 749 / 94 SUMMARY

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "DECISION NUMBER 749 / 94 SUMMARY"

Transcription

1 DECISION NUMBER 749 / 94 SUMMARY The worker suffered a whiplash injury in a compensable motor vehicle accident in May The worker appealed a decision of the Hearings Officer denying entitlement when the worker stopped working in October On the evidence, the worker suffered the whiplash injury and was off work for about three weeks. The Panel accepted the evidence of the worker's treating doctors, who had greater familiarity with his symptoms, rather than evidence of the insurer's doctor, who had met with the worker only once, and found that the worker continued to suffer pain related to the accident subsequent to October 1991, and that the pain was directly responsible for the worker's inability to continue to work. The appeal was allowed. [8 pages]

2 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 749 / 94 This appeal was heard in Toronto on September 29, 1994, by a Tribunal Panel consisting of: E. Newman : Vice-Chair, G.K. Howes: Member representative of employers, M. Cook : Member representative of workers. THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS The worker brings this appeal from the decision of Hearings Officer N. Holsmer, dated September 23, The worker attended and was represented by Christopher James, a lawyer with Robert C. Cronish and Associates. The employer did not attend and was not represented. On this appeal the worker seeks entitlement to workers' compensation benefits for a disability arising out of a work-related accident on May 27, The disability, he claims, caused him to lay off work as of October 15, 1991, and has continued to entitle him to benefits after that date. THE EVIDENCE The Panel heard evidence under oath from the worker and considered the following documents: Exhibit #1: Case Description; Exhibit #2: Addendum #1; Exhibit #3: Addendum #2; Exhibit #4: Addendum #3. THE NATURE OF THE CASE On May 27, 1991, the worker was employed as a property manager. His job involved the day-to-day management of 11 commercial properties. He was responsible for the collection of rent, arranging for maintenance and repairs, liaison with appropriate municipal authorities, supervising cleaning staff, attending to the satisfaction of tenants, and to some extent, the marketing and leasing of properties. On May 27, 1991, while in the course of his employment, the worker was involved in a motor vehicle accident. He was driving his own vehicle on company business when he was struck by a tractor trailer on the

3 2 passenger side of his vehicle. Although, at the time of this accident, the worker was suffering from a continuing low back disability arising out of an earlier compensable accident (and for which the worker receives a permanent partial disability award in the amount of 20%) he states that the accident of May 27, 1991, resulted in a different compensable disability. In this accident, the worker claims that he suffered a severe whiplash injury which has produced continuing neck and shoulder pain, headaches, and most recently, a loss of mobility and strength in his hands and wrists. The Workers' Compensation Board has denied the worker entitlement to benefits for disability arising out of the incident of May 27, 1991, because it was not satisfied that that accident did produce a physical disability. The Workers' Compensation Board was not satisfied that, if there was a disability resulting from that accident, it disabled the worker from continuing in employment and earning income. The Workers' Compensation Board concluded that there was no evidence which established that the worker missed any work due to his disability after the first three week period immediately following May 27, The Workers' Compensation Board concluded that the medical evidence did not support the conclusion that this accident resulted in any disability to the worker. It also concluded that the termination of employment was a result of the employer laying him off rather than for reasons pertaining to his disability. THE PANEL'S REASONS There is no question that a motor vehicle accident occurred on May 27, 1991, that the worker was involved in that accident, or that he sought medical treatment as a result. Exhibit #1 contains the police report of the motor vehicle accident. Exhibit #1 also contains the emergency room record of the Toronto Western Hospital dated May 27, The emergency room report makes reference to the motor vehicle accident, and reveals that the worker was examined by emergency room staff. The emergency room note makes reference to the worker's "minor back problem (old)", as well as to the fact that on that date he had a full range of motion, was walking well and had no disability. He did complain of pain in right leg and right shoulder. The worker explained that he was not suffering from noticeable pain immediately after the accident, and was advised by the emergency room staff to take a few days off work to rest, and to see his family doctor. The Case Description also reveals that the worker did attend at his family doctor's office on the day after the accident, May 28, The clinical record of the worker's family doctor, Dr. Rajinder Kashyap, records that the worker attended on that day and complained of right-sided neck, right leg and low back pain. Anti-inflammatory medication was prescribed. The family physician's notes clearly link these symptoms to the motor vehicle accident of

4 3 the previous day. The family doctor's clinical records also reveals that the worker attended with respect to the same complaints on June 4, 1991, and on June 13, The family physician referred the worker for physiotherapy treatment. The physiotherapy clinic reported to the Workers' Compensation Board on May 21, 1993, and confirmed that the worker was referred to the clinic for a strained neck, back and right ankle on May 28, 1991, by the family physician. From the medical reporting immediately contemporaneous with the accident of May 27, 1991, this Panel has no difficulty in concluding that the worker did suffer an injury to his neck in the motor vehicle accident of May 27, (i) What effect did this injury have upon the worker's ability to perform his usual job? As mentioned, the Hearings Officer concluded that there was no evidence which substantiated the worker's contention that the disability impaired his ability to work after a three-week recovery period following this accident. Indeed, the worker's former employer was interviewed repeatedly by the investigation staff of the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer reported to the Board that the worker did continue to work after a brief period of rest following the accident. In evidence, the worker vigorously contests the evidence provided by the employer to the Workers' Compensation Board Investigator. He maintains that he was off work for a full three weeks, and then, because he was highly motivated to return to work, returned for just two to four hours a day, only two to three days a week. The worker maintains that he continued with the part-time performance at work until his disability worsened in October 1991, requiring him to lay off. The Panel notes that in addition to the evidence provided to the Investigator by the worker's former employer, and contrary to the factual conclusion of the Hearings Officer, there is evidence which supports the worker's description of his ability to work in the five month period following the motor vehicle accident. The first of these is the clinical record of the worker's family doctor, Dr. Kashyap. His clinical record of June 13, 1991, states: Backache continues, can't sit or stand for more than three hours at a time. Working 4 hours a day for finish[ing] day to day things at job. Tender (L) parasacral area and (R) supraspinatous. Movements of back worse - forward bending - hands, neck, mid-calf area. Flexeril ten milligrams b.i.d. (30).

5 4 The second document which corroborates the worker's description of his ability to work in the period immediately following the accident is the physiotherapy clinic's report dated May 21, 1993: [The worker] was referred to the clinic for a strained neck and back and right ankle on May 28, 1991, by Dr. Kashyap. He first attended the clinic on June 3, He was assessed and treated for the above noted injuries. He did complain of both right and left neck pain with referral to the shoulder blade. After three weeks of treatment, he returned to part-time duties. Since his progress was very slow, I had explained to him in September 1991 that it was important that he take some time off work to speed up his recovery. Being a very responsible individual, [the worker] insisted on continuing his job to the best of his ability part-time while undergoing therapy. By October 1991, [the worker] realized he was not going to improve while performing his job. He stopped work.... The third piece of evidence which corroborates the worker's description of his ability to work after the accident comes in the form of an application to his automobile insurer. This document, stamped with a received note by the insurer on June 19, 1991, describes the motor vehicle accident, and informs the insurer that the worker did not return to work after the May 27, 1991, accident. In the view of this Panel, there does exist evidence which corroborates the worker's assertion that after the accident of May 27, 1991, he took more time off work than the two or three days which the employer reported to the Investigator. He did not, as the employer reported to the Workers' Compensation Board, return and perform his usual job two or three days after the accident occurred. The Panel is satisfied, that more probably than not, the worker did take three weeks off work, and then returned to work only on a part-time basis. Having concluded this much, the Panel notes that the employer did pay the worker his full salary during the months of May, June, July, August and September Although application was made for motor vehicle insurance benefits during this period, a cheque for wage loss benefits was returned to the insurer because the employer continued to cover the worker's wages. It is not until October 15, 1991, that the worker claims entitlement to temporary total disability benefits arising out of this accident. That is the date upon which, he claims, it was necessary, because of the disability, for him to leave work. The employer reported to the Workers' Compensation Board that before the motor vehicle accident of May 27, 1991, it had given the

6 worker notice of the fact that it intended to terminate his services. The employer reported that the worker's performance was inadequate, and that regardless of the accident or any disability, it intended to terminate him, and gave him notice to that effect. The worker disputes this fact, and maintains that the employer never gave him notice of any such intent. Indeed, the worker points out that the employer had increased his salary and his travel allowance in recognition of good performance. 5 (ii) What medical evidence exists which describes the worker's condition near the time of lay off? First, the Panel notes that the worker attended for regular physiotherapy sessions, five days a week, from June 3, 1991, until April 3, (Exhibit #2 page 6.) The clinical notes provided by the worker's family doctor, Dr. Kashyap, reveal regular appointments during June, July, September and October 1991, in which complaints of cervical pain are repeated. The family physician continued to prescribe anti-inflammatory medication. By December 30, 1991, the worker was examined by Dr. James Kirk Houston, on behalf of the motor vehicle insurer. Dr. Houston opined: In summary, from the history given, as the result of an alleged motor vehicle accident of on or about May 27, 1991, in all probability the worker sustained an acceleration deceleration injury which in turn, in all probability, produced a bending strain of the neck and back region, the so called whiplash type of injury as well as what may have been strain of the left shoulder girdle. Such injuries may have given rise to some acute local symptomatology which required him to seek medical attention and which may have been sufficient to interfere with some activities for some weeks thereafter. Having the results of today's physical examination to hand, no organic reason was detected to account for the alleged intensity and persistence of symptomatology despite months of treatment. The Panel takes Dr. Houston's report to identify that the worker did suffer from a whiplash injury on May 27, The Panel also takes Dr. Houston's report as revealing an impression of exaggeration of the degree of disability on the part of the worker by December 30, Dr. Houston's view is not shared by either the worker's family doctor, or by the physiatrist who saw him subsequently, Dr. A. Kachooie.

7 6 The family physician Dr. Kashyap reports a genuine and severe disability resulting from the May 27, 1991, accident. He reports, for example, on March 3, 1992: [The worker] was involved in a car accident on May 27, 1991, and was first seen by me the following day. He complained of pain in right side of the neck, lower back and right leg. Movements on that day were within normal limits but there was some tenderness over the right parasacral right supraspinatous, right stenomastoid and over right medial malcolus. He has been treated at Toronto Western Hospital following the accident and put on flexeril. He was advised to continue the same and was sent for physiotherapy. There has been some improvement in [the worker's] symptoms with the treatment. He still continues to have pain and feeling of stiffness in the left paravertebral muscles. He was unable to stay in one position for over an hour.... Dr. Kachooie, the physiatrist reported on March 31, 1992: He has experienced symptoms of pain, stiffness to the cervical spine almost on an ongoing basis, the pain in the cervical spine has a tendency to spread diffusely to the top of the shoulders, base of the neck, mid-back area. He has had an element of pain spreading to the left arm, forearm, associated with a pulling sensation to the arm. He has had symptoms of paraesthesia, consistent numbness, tingling, pins and needles which mostly bothers him at night. His symptoms however are bilateral. Dr. Kachooie also reports frequent headaches since the accident, and pain sensations in the chest wall. Dr. Kachooie opines that the worker has suffered a "quite severe degree of whiplash with a post-whiplash myofascial pain syndrome and complications of greater occipital neuralgia headaches". Neither Dr. Kashyap nor Dr. Kachooie suggest exaggeration of the degree of disability on the part of the worker. It is the Panel's view that the reports of the treating physicians who have greater familiarity with the worker and his symptoms, and greater opportunity to observe his behaviour and reaction to pain, are to be preferred to the report of the insurer's physician, Dr. Houston. The latter met with the worker on only one occasion, in the context of an assessment for insurance purposes only. It is our conclusion that the weight of the medical evidence does support the finding that after October 15, 1991, the worker did suffer continuing pain resulting from a whiplash injury sustained in

8 the May 27, 1991, accident, and that this pain was directly responsible for his inability to continue work. (iii) Conclusions The conclusions of this Panel are limited to the finding that the worker is entitled to workers' compensation benefits for a disability arising out of the May 27, 1991, motor vehicle accident. However, as discussed with the worker's representative, the question of the nature and degree of the disability, and the extent and duration of the worker's entitlement to benefits resulting therefrom, is a matter to be determined by the Workers' Compensation Board. 7 THE DECISION The worker's appeal is allowed. The nature and degree of the worker's entitlement to workers' compensation benefits after October 15, 1991, arising out of the motor vehicle accident of May 27, 1991, is referred to the Workers' Compensation Board for determination. DATED at Toronto, this 24th day of October, SIGNED: E. Newman, G.K. Howes, M. Cook.

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 143/97. Suitable employment.

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 143/97. Suitable employment. SUMMARY DECISION NO. 143/97 Suitable employment. The worker slipped and fell in January 1992, injuring her low back and hip. She was awarded a 28% NEL award for her low back condition. The worker appealed

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION DONALD BRYAN SMITHHISLER Claimant VS. LIFE CARE CENTERS AMERICA, INC. Respondent Docket No. 1,014,349 AND OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE

More information

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 248/97. Continuing entitlement.

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 248/97. Continuing entitlement. SUMMARY DECISION NO. 248/97 Continuing entitlement. The worker slipped and fell backwards in October 1991. The worker appealed a decision of the Hearings Officer denying entitlement for organic neck and

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL 2001 ONWSIAT 1893 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 193/00 [1] This appeal was heard in Toronto on September 22, 2000, by Tribunal Vice-Chair N. McCombie. THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NUMBER F205928 DOUGLAS EUGENE WHIPKEY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT XPRESS BOATS, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NUMBER F205928 DOUGLAS EUGENE WHIPKEY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT XPRESS BOATS, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NUMBER F205928 DOUGLAS EUGENE WHIPKEY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT XPRESS BOATS, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO., INSURANCE CARRIER RESPONDENT

More information

Employees Compensation Appeals Board

Employees Compensation Appeals Board U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employees Compensation Appeals Board In the Matter of BRENDA K. ANDREWS and U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, Chillicothe, OH Docket No. 03-780; Submitted on the Record; Issued

More information

DECISION NO. 1708/10

DECISION NO. 1708/10 B. Kalvin WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1708/10 BEFORE: B. Kalvin : Vice-Chair HEARING: September 9, 2010 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: September 15, 2010 NEUTRAL CITATION:

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION MARY JANE WAGGONER ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,001,815 THE BOEING COMPANY ) Respondent ) AND ) ) INSURANCE COMPANY ) STATE

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL 2005 ONWSIAT 469 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1300/04 [1] This appeal was considered in Toronto on August 3, 2004, by Tribunal Vice-Chair M. Crystal. THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1602/11

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1602/11 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1602/11 BEFORE: M. M. Cohen: Vice-Chair HEARING: August 16, 2011 at Toronto Written DATE OF DECISION: August 23, 2011 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2011

More information

L. R. v. Fletcher Allen Health Care (January 4, 2007) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

L. R. v. Fletcher Allen Health Care (January 4, 2007) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR L. R. v. Fletcher Allen Health Care (January 4, 2007) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR L. R. Opinion No. 57-06WC By: Margaret A. Mangan v. Hearing Officer Fletcher Allen Health Care For: Patricia Moulton

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1119/09

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1119/09 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1119/09 BEFORE: T. Mitchinson: Vice-Chair HEARING: June 3, 2009 at Sudbury Oral DATE OF DECISION: June 8, 2009 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2009 ONWSIAT

More information

FD: FD: DT:D DN:81/87 STY: PANEL:O'Neil; Lankin; Jago DDATE:241287 TYPE:A ACT: DECON:81/87L CCON: SCON: BDG:Claims Adjudication Branch Procedures

FD: FD: DT:D DN:81/87 STY: PANEL:O'Neil; Lankin; Jago DDATE:241287 TYPE:A ACT: DECON:81/87L CCON: SCON: BDG:Claims Adjudication Branch Procedures FD: FD: DT:D DN:81/87 STY: PANEL:O'Neil; Lankin; Jago DDATE:241287 TYPE:A ACT: DECON:81/87L CCON: SCON: BDG:Claims Adjudication Branch Procedures Manual, document no. 33-13-09; Claims Services Division

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: [PERSONAL INFORMATION] CASE ID #[PERSONAL INFORMATION] APPELLANT AND: WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RESPONDENT DECISION #199 Appellant

More information

FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION. Applicant Name: JOHN DOE Appointment Date: 01-01-10

FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION. Applicant Name: JOHN DOE Appointment Date: 01-01-10 FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION REFERRAL FOR INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION Applicant Name: JOHN DOE Appointment Date: 01-01-10 Time: 3:00 p.m. Date Name of Doctor Address Dear Dr.. On

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL [PERSONAL INFORMATION] CASE ID #[PERSONAL INFORMATION] WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL [PERSONAL INFORMATION] CASE ID #[PERSONAL INFORMATION] WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: [PERSONAL INFORMATION] CASE ID #[PERSONAL INFORMATION] APPELLANT AND: WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RESPONDENT DECISION #194 Appellant

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD APPEAL TRIBUNAL. [Personal information] CASE I.D. #[personal information]

WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD APPEAL TRIBUNAL. [Personal information] CASE I.D. #[personal information] WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD APPEAL TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: [personal information] CASE I.D. #[personal information] PLAINTIFF AND: WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND DEFENDANT DECISION #41 [Personal

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL. EMPLOYER CASE ID #[personal information] WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND WORKER DECISION #114

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL. EMPLOYER CASE ID #[personal information] WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND WORKER DECISION #114 WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: EMPLOYER CASE ID #[personal information] AND: APPELLANT WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RESPONDENT AND: WORKER EMPLOYEE DECISION #114 Appellant

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1047/14

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1047/14 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1047/14 BEFORE: C. M. MacAdam: Vice-Chair HEARING: June 3, 2014 at Toronto Written DATE OF DECISION: June 18, 2014 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2014 ONWSIAT

More information

The Prognosis Of Neck Injuries Resulting From Rear-end Vehicle Collisions. The Journal Of Bone And Joint Surgery (British)

The Prognosis Of Neck Injuries Resulting From Rear-end Vehicle Collisions. The Journal Of Bone And Joint Surgery (British) The Prognosis Of Neck Injuries Resulting From Rear-end Vehicle Collisions 1 S. H. Norris, I. Watt FROM ABSTRACT The Journal Of Bone And Joint Surgery (British) November 1983, Vol. 65-B. No. 5 Injury of

More information

Auto Accident Questionnaire

Auto Accident Questionnaire Auto Accident Questionnaire Patient s Name: Date Of Accident: Date: Social History: (please complete the following, check all boxes that apply) Are you: Married Single Divorced Widowed # of Children: #

More information

SUMMARY. Carpal tunnel syndrome; Permanent impairment [NEL] (rating schedule) (AMA Guides) (functional impairment).

SUMMARY. Carpal tunnel syndrome; Permanent impairment [NEL] (rating schedule) (AMA Guides) (functional impairment). SUMMARY DECISION NO. 1033/98 Carpal tunnel syndrome; Permanent impairment [NEL] (rating schedule) (AMA Guides) (functional impairment). The worker was a stope miner for four years beginning in 1987. In

More information

Noteworthy Decision Summary. Decision: WCAT-2003-01952 Panel: D. Dukelow Decision Date: August 11, 2003

Noteworthy Decision Summary. Decision: WCAT-2003-01952 Panel: D. Dukelow Decision Date: August 11, 2003 Noteworthy Decision Summary Decision: WCAT-2003-01952 Panel: D. Dukelow Decision Date: August 11, 2003 Re-opening Previous Decision Sections 96(2) and 240(2) of the Workers Compensation Act Item #102.01

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F910691. TERRY FOSTER, Employee. TYSON SALES & DISTRIBUTION, Self-Insured Employer

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F910691. TERRY FOSTER, Employee. TYSON SALES & DISTRIBUTION, Self-Insured Employer BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F910691 TERRY FOSTER, Employee TYSON SALES & DISTRIBUTION, Self-Insured Employer CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 20, 2013 Hearing

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F608015. AMANDA VOLKMANN, Employee. SONIC DRIVE-IN, Employer

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F608015. AMANDA VOLKMANN, Employee. SONIC DRIVE-IN, Employer BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F608015 AMANDA VOLKMANN, Employee SONIC DRIVE-IN, Employer FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED

More information

NO. COA08-1063 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 June 2009

NO. COA08-1063 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 June 2009 An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)

More information

NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL

NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Appellant: [X] (Employer) Participants entitled to respond to this appeal: [X] (Worker) and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) APPEAL

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 2115/14

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 2115/14 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 2115/14 BEFORE: C. M. MacAdam : Vice-Chair S. T. Sahay : Member Representative of Employers K. Hoskin : Member Representative of Workers HEARING:

More information

FD: ACN=235 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 1290/87 STY: PANEL: Bradbury; Beattie; Apsey DDATE: 180188 ACT: 40(2) KEYW: Temporary total disability; Temporary

FD: ACN=235 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 1290/87 STY: PANEL: Bradbury; Beattie; Apsey DDATE: 180188 ACT: 40(2) KEYW: Temporary total disability; Temporary FD: ACN=235 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 1290/87 STY: PANEL: Bradbury; Beattie; Apsey DDATE: 180188 ACT: 40(2) KEYW: Temporary total disability; Temporary partial disability. SUM: - Tribunal found that worker was

More information

PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE. NAME: Date of Accident

PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE. NAME: Date of Accident PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE NAME: Date of Accident Where did accident happen? Describe the accident in your own words: What was your position in the car? Driver: if Driver were your hands on the steering

More information

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 98-C-1403 WILLIS THOMAS Versus TOWN OF ARNAUDVILLE PER CURIAM* This is a workers compensation case. The workers compensation judge found plaintiff failed to establish a work-related

More information

APPEAL NO. 970713 FILED JUNE 4, 1997

APPEAL NO. 970713 FILED JUNE 4, 1997 APPEAL NO. 970713 FILED JUNE 4, 1997 This appeal arises under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). On March 3, 1997, a contested case hearing (CCH) was held.

More information

Employees Compensation Appeals Board

Employees Compensation Appeals Board U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employees Compensation Appeals Board In the Matter of GEORGE G. WILK and U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, MORAINE VALLEY FACILITY, Bridgeview, IL Docket No. 03-453; Submitted on the Record;

More information

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 1007/99. Accident (occurrence).

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 1007/99. Accident (occurrence). SUMMARY DECISION NO. 1007/99 Accident (occurrence). The worker appealed a decision of the Appeals Resolution Officer denying entitlement for low back disability. The worker experienced the onset of back

More information

John Coronis v. Granger Northern Inc. (April 27, 2010) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

John Coronis v. Granger Northern Inc. (April 27, 2010) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR John Coronis v. Granger Northern Inc. (April 27, 2010) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR John Coronis Opinion No. 16-10WC v. By: Sal Spinosa, Esq. Hearing Officer Granger Northern, Inc. ATTORNEYS: For:

More information

FD: ACN=1004 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 609/87 STY:PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Jago DDATE:23/07/87 ACT: 40(3) [old 41(2)], 40(2)(b) [old 41(1)(b)] KEYW:

FD: ACN=1004 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 609/87 STY:PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Jago DDATE:23/07/87 ACT: 40(3) [old 41(2)], 40(2)(b) [old 41(1)(b)] KEYW: FD: ACN=1004 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 609/87 STY:PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Jago DDATE:23/07/87 ACT: 40(3) [old 41(2)], 40(2)(b) [old 41(1)(b)] KEYW: Temporary partial disability (level of benefits); Availability

More information

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 70/98. Delay (treatment); Kienbock's disease.

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 70/98. Delay (treatment); Kienbock's disease. SUMMARY DECISION NO. 70/98 Delay (treatment); Kienbock's disease. A construction worker injured his wrist while moving a plank on September 25, 1991. He continued working and did not seek medical treatment

More information

WORKCOVER DIVISION Case No.C12401789 --- S GARNETT MELBOURNE REASONS FOR DECISION ---

WORKCOVER DIVISION Case No.C12401789 --- S GARNETT MELBOURNE REASONS FOR DECISION --- !Undefined Bookmark, I IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE WORKCOVER DIVISION Case No.C12401789 ZIVKA SAPAZOVSKI Plaintiff v ONE FORCE GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Defendant --- MAGISTRATE: S

More information

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER United States Department of Labor V.L., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. PROBATION DEPARTMENT, New York City, NY, Employer Appearances: Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant Office of Solicitor,

More information

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division WHSCRD Case No: 14152-06 WHSCC Claim No: 606499 and 791748 Decision Number: 14147 Lloyd Piercey Review Commissioner The Review Proceedings 1. The

More information

SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DIVISION OF LABOR AND MANAGEMENT

SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DIVISION OF LABOR AND MANAGEMENT SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DIVISION OF LABOR AND MANAGEMENT GREG STURTZ, HF No. 277, 2000/01 Claimant, v. DECISION YOUNKERS, INC., Employer, and LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., Insurer. This is a workers

More information

[Cite as State ex rel. Tracy v. Indus. Comm., 121 Ohio St.3d 477, 2009-Ohio-1386.]

[Cite as State ex rel. Tracy v. Indus. Comm., 121 Ohio St.3d 477, 2009-Ohio-1386.] [Cite as State ex rel. Tracy v. Indus. Comm., 121 Ohio St.3d 477, 2009-Ohio-1386.] THE STATE EX REL. TRACY, APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO; AUTOZONE, INC., APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel.

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION GEORGIA R. KATZ ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,068,293 USD 229 ) Self-Insured Respondent ) ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Claimant

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1617/14

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1617/14 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1617/14 BEFORE: T. Mitchinson: Vice-Chair HEARING: August 29, 2014 at Sudbury Oral DATE OF DECISION: September 4, 2014 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2014

More information

NOTEWORTHY DECISION SUMMARY. Decision: WCAT-2004-02435-RB Panel: Beatrice Anderson Decision Date: May 10, 2004

NOTEWORTHY DECISION SUMMARY. Decision: WCAT-2004-02435-RB Panel: Beatrice Anderson Decision Date: May 10, 2004 NOTEWORTHY DECISION SUMMARY Decision: WCAT-2004-02435-RB Panel: Beatrice Anderson Decision Date: May 10, 2004 Referrals to Board of Issue for Determination - Completion of Appeals after Referral - Section

More information

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER United States Department of Labor T.M., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, New York, NY, Employer Appearances: Thomas S. Harkins, Esq., for the appellant

More information

STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY

STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY ) State File No. P-20799 ) Nancy Conrad ) By: Margaret A. Mangan ) Hearing Officer v. ) ) For: R. Tasha Wallis Central Vermont Hospital ) Commissioner

More information

Fact Sheet: Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS)

Fact Sheet: Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS) Fact Sheet: Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS) What is OOS? Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS) is the term given to a range of conditions characterised by discomfort or persistent pain in muscles, tendons

More information

Upper Arm. Shoulder Blades R L B R L B WHICH SIDE IS MORE PAINFUL? (CERVICAL PAIN SIDE) RIGHT LEFT EQUAL NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) CERVICAL.

Upper Arm. Shoulder Blades R L B R L B WHICH SIDE IS MORE PAINFUL? (CERVICAL PAIN SIDE) RIGHT LEFT EQUAL NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) CERVICAL. 1 NECK PAIN Patient Name In order to properly assess your condition, we must understand how much your NECK/ARM problems has affected your ability to manage everyday activities. For each item below, please

More information

Gilbert Varela, M.D., Inc 5232 E. Beverly Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90022 Phone: (323) 724-6911 Fax: (323) 724-6915

Gilbert Varela, M.D., Inc 5232 E. Beverly Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90022 Phone: (323) 724-6911 Fax: (323) 724-6915 Gilbert Varela, M.D., Inc 5232 E. Beverly Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90022 Phone: (323) 724-6911 Fax: (323) 724-6915 September 10, 2007 Law offices of xxxxxxxxx Santa Monica, CA 90405 REGARDING:

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY PAMELA R. LECOMPTE, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) C. A. No. 02A-01-010 JEB CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH ) SYSTEMS, ) ) Respondent. ) Submitted:

More information

Medical Report Prepared for The Court on

Medical Report Prepared for The Court on Medical Report Prepared for The Court on Mr Sample Report Claimant's Address Claimant's Date of Birth Instructing Party Instructing Party Address Instructing Party Ref Solicitors Ref Corex Ref 1 The Lane

More information

IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION

IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED "NOT TO BE PUBLISHED." PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT, CR 76.28(4)(C), THIS OPINION IS

More information

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER United States Department of Labor B.P., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, MD, Employer Docket No. 13-1726 Issued: January 30, 2014 Appearances: Appellant,

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1708/15

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1708/15 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1708/15 BEFORE: E. Kosmidis : Vice-Chair E. Tracey : Member Representative of Employers C. Salama : Member Representative of Workers HEARING:

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1348/08

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1348/08 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1348/08 BEFORE: B.L. Cook: Vice-Chair HEARING: June 10, 2008 at Toronto DATE OF DECISION: June 25, 2008 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2008 ONWSIAT 1781

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE December 14, 2000 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE December 14, 2000 Session IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE December 14, 2000 Session PHILIPS CONSUMER ELECTRONICS COMPANY v. KATHY A. JENNINGS Direct Appeal from the Circuit

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G103629 SHIKITA WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JULY 10, 2013

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G103629 SHIKITA WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JULY 10, 2013 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G103629 SHIKITA WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, EMPLOYER PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT

More information

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 163/93. Recurrences (compensable injury); Second accident; Intervening causes; Apportionment (pensions).

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 163/93. Recurrences (compensable injury); Second accident; Intervening causes; Apportionment (pensions). SUMMARY DECISION NO. 163/93 Recurrences (compensable injury); Second accident; Intervening causes; Apportionment (pensions). The worker suffered a back injury in 1985. The employer appealed a decision

More information

Boutwell v. Hubbardton Forge (July 1, 2003) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ARBITRATION DECISION AND ORDER

Boutwell v. Hubbardton Forge (July 1, 2003) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ARBITRATION DECISION AND ORDER Boutwell v. Hubbardton Forge (July 1, 2003) STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY Michelle Boutwell ) ) State File No. P-07188 v. ) ) Hubbardton Forge ) Phyllis Severance, Esq. ) Arbitrator APPEARANCES:

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204754. JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Employee. MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH, Employer

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204754. JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Employee. MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH, Employer BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204754 JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Employee MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH, Employer SISTERS OF MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F102457 OPINION FILED JULY 20, 2004

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F102457 OPINION FILED JULY 20, 2004 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F102457 KEN WATERS, EMPLOYEE CENTURY TUBE CORPORATION, EMPLOYER CROCKETT ADJUSTMENT, CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS. Agency No.

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS. Agency No. STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS In the matter of Vivian B. Nalu, Petitioner v Public School Employees Retirement System, Respondent / Docket No. 2000-1872

More information

FD: FD: DT:D DN: 675/93 STY: PANEL: Newman; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE:080494 ACT: KEYW: Delay (onset of symptoms); Heart condition (traumatic).

FD: FD: DT:D DN: 675/93 STY: PANEL: Newman; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE:080494 ACT: KEYW: Delay (onset of symptoms); Heart condition (traumatic). FD: FD: DT:D DN: 675/93 STY: PANEL: Newman; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE:080494 ACT: KEYW: Delay (onset of symptoms); Heart condition (traumatic). SUM: The worker's arm was caught in a conveyor belt and was

More information

THE PHYSIO CENTRE. Motor Vehicle Accident. Instructions for Completing the Forms in this package

THE PHYSIO CENTRE. Motor Vehicle Accident. Instructions for Completing the Forms in this package THE PHYSIO CENTRE Motor Vehicle Accident Instructions for Completing the Forms in this package There are 2 forms enclosed in this package which are required for patients under MVA coverage. 1. Agree To

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION RONALD L. MARTENS Claimant VS. BRULEZ FOUNDATION, INC. Respondent Docket No. 1,019,265 AND COMMERCE & INDUSTRY INS. CO. Insurance

More information

Frequently Asked Questions About Georgia Workers Compensation Ty Wilson Attorney At Law 1-866-937-5454 www.tywilsonlaw.

Frequently Asked Questions About Georgia Workers Compensation Ty Wilson Attorney At Law 1-866-937-5454 www.tywilsonlaw. Frequently Asked Questions About Georgia Workers Compensation Ty Wilson Attorney At Law 1-866-937-5454 www.tywilsonlaw.com Special Report Frequently Asked Questions About Claims Special Report Ty Wilson

More information

MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION SUMMARY ADVICE FORM

MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION SUMMARY ADVICE FORM Form 1.03 July 9, 2014 MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION SUMMARY ADVICE FORM TO: (Name) (Address) FROM: KUBITZ & COMPANY Lawyers 1716 10 th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T3C 0J8 (City, Province, Postal Code) Home

More information

George Allen Moore Moore. Johnston, Moore & Thompson & Thompson. Huntsville, AL AL 35801 35801 (256) 533-5770. www.alabamajusticecenter.

George Allen Moore Moore. Johnston, Moore & Thompson & Thompson. Huntsville, AL AL 35801 35801 (256) 533-5770. www.alabamajusticecenter. Medical Vocational and Disability and Disability Benefits Benefits What Rights To Medical, To Medical, Vocational, Vocational, And Disability And Benefits Disability Benefits Does an an Injured Injured

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 376/08

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 376/08 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 376/08 BEFORE: A. Morris: Vice-Chair HEARING: February 7, 2008 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: June 9, 2008 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2008 ONWSIAT

More information

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL CASE NO. 18 Z 600 19775 03 2 A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS In the Matter of the Arbitration between (Claimant) AAA CASE NO.: 18 Z 600 19775 03 v.

More information

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1015/94

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1015/94 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1015/94 This appeal was heard by conference call between Toronto and Thunder Bay on December 1, 1994, by a Tribunal Panel consisting of: J.P. Moore:

More information

CITATION: Danny Weston AND Q-COMP (WC/2012/35) - Decision QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION: Danny Weston AND Q-COMP (WC/2012/35) - Decision <http://www.qirc.qld.gov.au> QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION CITATION: Danny Weston AND Q-COMP (WC/2012/35) - Decision QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 - s. 550 - procedure for

More information

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER United States Department of Labor L.K., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PHILADELPHIA TERMINAL MARKET, Philadelphia, PA, Employer Appearances: Appellant, pro se Office of Solicitor, for the Director

More information

MARITIME WORKER JOB RELATED INJURY

MARITIME WORKER JOB RELATED INJURY JEFFREY S. MUTNICK, P.C. jmutnick@mutnicklaw.com Admitted in Oregon MARITIME WORKER JOB RELATED INJURY As a maritime worker, your employer must provide compensation for job-related injuries. This entitlement

More information

Commonwealth of Kentucky Workers Compensation Board

Commonwealth of Kentucky Workers Compensation Board Commonwealth of Kentucky Workers Compensation Board OPINION ENTERED: March 25, 2014 CLAIM NO. 201166969 REBECCA MAHAN PETITIONER VS. APPEAL FROM HON. R. SCOTT BORDERS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE PROFESSIONAL

More information

STATE BOARD OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION Heritage Tower, Suite 200, 18 9th Street Columbus, Georgia 31901 (706) 649-7372 www.sbwc.georgia.

STATE BOARD OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION Heritage Tower, Suite 200, 18 9th Street Columbus, Georgia 31901 (706) 649-7372 www.sbwc.georgia. 2012003449 Trial Heritage Tower, Suite 200, 18 9th Street Columbus, Georgia 31901 (706) 649-7372 www.sbwc.georgia.gov STATEMENT OF CASE The employee requested a hearing in the above referenced claim for

More information

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division WHSCRD Case No: WHSCC Claim No: Decision Number: 15171 Gordon Murphy Review Commissioner The Review Proceedings 1. The hearing of the review application

More information

Whiplash Associated Disorder

Whiplash Associated Disorder Whiplash Associated Disorder Bourassa & Associates Rehabilitation Centre What is Whiplash? Whiplash is a non-medical term used to describe neck pain following hyperflexion or hyperextension of the tissues

More information

PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE

PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE Dr. John Bellomo Director 6442 Edgewater Drive Orlando, Florida 32810 (407) 295.1077 PERSONAL INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Date: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Address: City/State/Zip: Email Address: Age Birth

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1025/94 This appeal was heard in Toronto on December 5, 1994, by a Tribunal Panel consisting of: R.E. Hartman : Vice-Chair, G.M. Nipshagen: Member representative

More information

Cervical Spine. New Patient Form

Cervical Spine. New Patient Form Cervical Spine New Patient Form Please mark the painful areas on the pictures below Use the following marks: stabbing pain ooo burning pain +++ aching pain pins and needles = = = numbness Right Right Right

More information

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL CASE NO. 18 Z 600 01641 03 2 A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS In the Matter of the Arbitration between (Claimant) AAA CASE NO.: 18 Z 600 01641 03 v.

More information

WORKERS GUIDE YUKON WORKERS COMPENSATION HEALTH AND SAFETY BOARD. working together WITH YUKON WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS

WORKERS GUIDE YUKON WORKERS COMPENSATION HEALTH AND SAFETY BOARD. working together WITH YUKON WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS WORKERS GUIDE YUKON WORKERS COMPENSATION HEALTH AND SAFETY BOARD working together WITH YUKON WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS workers compensation WORKERS COMPENSATION Workers compensation is an employer-funded insurance

More information

20. Please describe any pain or symptoms: a. DURING the accident: b. IMMEDIATELY AFTER the accident: c. LATER THAT DAY: d.

20. Please describe any pain or symptoms: a. DURING the accident: b. IMMEDIATELY AFTER the accident: c. LATER THAT DAY: d. Name Date of Birth Phone Address City State Zip Email: Employer s Name Employer s Address Your Ins. Co. Claim # Claims Adjustors Name Driver/Owner Have you retained an attorney? ( ) Yes ( ) No If yes attorney

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G304790 JANE E. JAMES, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G304790 JANE E. JAMES, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC. BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G304790 JANE E. JAMES, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT TYSON POULTRY, INC., EMPLOYER TYNET CORPORATION INSURANCE CARRIER RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED

More information

What you should know

What you should know What you should know when you have been injured in a motor vehicle accident This booklet provides information about insurance benefits and other compensation that may be available to you when you have

More information

[Cite as State ex rel. Packaging Corp. of Am. v. Indus. Comm., 139 Ohio St.3d 591, 2014-Ohio- 2871.]

[Cite as State ex rel. Packaging Corp. of Am. v. Indus. Comm., 139 Ohio St.3d 591, 2014-Ohio- 2871.] [Cite as State ex rel. Packaging Corp. of Am. v. Indus. Comm., 139 Ohio St.3d 591, 2014-Ohio- 2871.] THE STATE EX REL. PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL.,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE February 23, 2009 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE February 23, 2009 Session IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE February 23, 2009 Session DON R. DILLEHAY v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION MARION A. DAVIS ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 216,570 CONSPEC MARKETING & MANUFACTURING CO. ) Respondent ) AND ) ) UNITED STATES

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION GARRETT QUINT ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 208,451 VANDEE STUCCO ) Respondent ) AND ) ) AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL ) INSURANCE COMPANY

More information

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BARBARA SHEREE HUTSON ) Claimant ) ) VS. ) Docket No. 1,035,700 ) CUSTOM CAMPERS, INC. ) Self-Insured Respondent ) ORDER Claimant

More information

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT APPELLATE DIVISION NELLIE FRANCIS VS. W.C.C. 04-03284 PROVIDENCE SCHOOL DEPARTMENT PROVIDENCE SCHOOL DEPARTMENT

More information

Automobile Injury Appeal Commission Province of Saskatchewan

Automobile Injury Appeal Commission Province of Saskatchewan Province of Saskatchewan Citation: S.R. v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance, 2009 SKAIA 001 Date: 20090119 File: 128 of 2006 BETWEEN S.R., Appellant and Saskatchewan Government Insurance, Respondent Appearances:

More information

Neck Injuries and Disorders

Neck Injuries and Disorders Neck Injuries and Disorders Introduction Any part of your neck can be affected by neck problems. These affect the muscles, bones, joints, tendons, ligaments or nerves in the neck. There are many common

More information

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Advanced Dermatology Associates : (Selective Insurance Company of : America), : Petitioners : : v. : No. 2186 C.D. 2014 : Submitted: May 22, 2015 Workers Compensation

More information

July 2003. Pre-approved Framework Guideline for Whiplash Associated Disorder Grade I Injuries With or Without Complaint of Back Symptoms

July 2003. Pre-approved Framework Guideline for Whiplash Associated Disorder Grade I Injuries With or Without Complaint of Back Symptoms Financial Services Commission of Ontario Commission des services financiers de l Ontario July 2003 Pre-approved Framework Guideline for Whiplash Associated Disorder Grade I Injuries With or Without Complaint

More information

Premier Healthcare of Placerville

Premier Healthcare of Placerville Premier Healthcare of Placerville 1980 Broadway, Placerville, CA 95667 (530) 622-3536 Fax (530) 622-3538 WORKERS COMPENSATION INJURY QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Social Security#: of Birth: Today s : To insure

More information

Document hosted at http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=2066f4aa-63a1-461f-a364-221d2e99642d

Document hosted at http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=2066f4aa-63a1-461f-a364-221d2e99642d How Much Is My ICBC Claim Worth? Each ICBC claim is unique. The value of any ICBC claim will depend on a number of factors including who is at fault, the type of injuries and the effect of the injuries

More information