How To Get A Payout From A Claim For A Medical Check In A Car Accident
|
|
- Tracy Floyd
- 3 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Ontario ~ Commission des Insurance assurances de Commission I Ontario Ontano OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF ARBITRATIONS Appeal P PAULO PINTO Appellant/Respondent and GENERAL ACCIDENT ASSURANCE CO. OF CANADA Respondent/Appellant BEFORE: COUNSEL: David R. Draper, Director s Delegate Gerald Steinberg (for Paulo Pinto) J. Claude Blouin (for General Accident) APPEAL ORDER Under section 283 of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.i.8, as amended, it is ordered that: 1. The appeals are dismissed and the arbitration decision order dated April 10, 1997, is confirmed. 2. Mr. Pinto is entitled to appeal expenses fixed at $250.00, payable by General Accident Assurance Co. of Canada. ~LC t~ ~ November 26, 1997 David R. Draper Director s Delegate I
2 REASONS FOR DECISION I. NATURE OF THE APPEAL Both parties appeal from the arbitration order dated April 10, Paulo Pinto submits that the arbitrator erred in denying his claim for weekly income benefits after September 5, General Accident Assurance Co. of Canada ( General Accident ) objects to the order requiring it to pay Mr. Pinto s arbitration expenses. More specifically, it contends that the arbitrator erred in not applying the November 1996 amendments to the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c II. BACKGROUND Mr. Pinto was involved in an automobile accident on October 5, The arbitrator found that he drove into the rear of a stationary vehicle when his brakes failed, resulting in strains to his back, right hip, thigh and shoulder. At the time of the accident, Mr. Pinto was 26 years old. He was a qualified journeyman carpenter, working in industrial and commercial construction. In the 20 weeks before the accident, he worked for a company building mausoleum crypts. This was a physically demanding job, involving heavy lifting. Mr. Pinto applied for weekly income benefits, claiming that his injuries prevented him from returning to work. General Accident paid him $600 per week for approximately eleven months. Effective September 5, 1994, however, it stopped paying on the basis that Mr. Pinto was capable of perfonning the essential tasks of his pre-accident work. Mr. Pinto did nothing to challenge General Accident s decision for 20 months. In April 1996, he retained his current lawyer and returned to see Dr. Alex Donskoy, the general practitioner who
3 treated him for the three months following the accident. He then applied for mediation, claiming weekly income benefits from September 5, 1994, onwards. When the dispute was not resolved through mediation, Mr. Pinto applied for arbitration. In August 1996, before the arbitration hearing took place, Mr. Pinto started working at his brother s auto body repair shop. He claimed, however, that he remained entitled to weekly income benefits at a reduced rate because he was still unable to perform the heavier duties of his pre-accident work. The arbitration hearing was held over two days in February Mr. Pinto was the only witness. Nine exhibits were filed, including a medical brief. The hearing was recorded by a court reporter, but neither party obtained a transcript for the appeal. In his decision, the arbitrator reviewed the evidence and made factual findings. He found Mr. Pinto s testimony vague and not persuasive. In addition, he preferred the opinion of Dr. Ernest 3. White, an orthopaedic surgeon retained by General Accident, to that of Dr. Donskoy. As a result, he concluded that Mr. Pinto was not entitled to weekly income benefits after September 5, The arbitrator then dealt with the question of arbitration expenses. Mr. Pinto claimed his expenses according to the general practice developed in previous decisions. General Accident argued that amendments to the Insurance Act had changed the rules. As of November 1, 1996, section 282(11) of the Act was replaced with a new version, allowing the arbitrator to award expenses to the insured person or the insurance company, not just to the insured person, as had been the case previously. Relying on this amendment, General Accident asked the arbitrator to order ~vfr. Pinto to pay its arbitration expenses. The arbitrator rejected General Accident s claim for expenses, holding that the new section should not be applied to arbitration proceedings already under way on November 1, In his -2-
4 Appeal Order P opinion, applying the new expense provision to ongoing proceedings would retroactively affect the insured person s right to recover expenses. Therefore, the arbitrator applied the law in effect in July 1996, when Mr. Pinto applied for arbitration. He ordered General Accident to pay Mr. Pinto s reasonable arbitration expenses, except the cost of a medical report that was filed late. III. WEEKLY INCOME BENEFITS A. Adjournment Mr. Pinto submits that the arbitrator erred in refi.ising his request that Dr. White be made available for cross-examination. For the following reasons, I agree with General Accident that the request came too late. A pre-hearing discussion took place in October 1996, with both parties represented by counsel. General Accident was required to give Mr. Pinto a list of its medical evidence and copies of any material not already provided to him. As a result, Mr. Pinto was aware that General Accident would be relying on Dr. White s reports. The pre-hearing letter also makes it clear that he knew General Accident did not plan to call any witnesses. Despite this, Mr. Pinto took no steps in the four months before the hearing to request or arrange for Dr. White s presence at the hearing. His attendance was raised for the first time after the hearing started. Dr. White was not available on such short notice and the arbitrator was not prepared to adjourn the hearing to arrange for his attendance. In my opinion, this was a reasonable exercise of the arbitrator s authority to control the process. The pre-hearing is designed to ensure that arbitration hearings proceed on the dates assigned. In this case, the process worked as it should. Mr. Pinto was not surprised by any unexpected witnesses or new reports. In fact, Dr. White s last involvement was in July 1994, more than two years before the hearing. Further, none of the other medical experts were called as witnesses, and -3-
5 Mr. Pinto was allowed to rely on a report from Dr. Donskoy, written just four days before the hearing, commenting on Dr. White s opinion. B. Entitlement Mr. Pinto s main submission is that the evidence does not support the arbitrator s conclusion that he is not entitled to weekly income benefits after September 5, As an alternative argument, he submits that even if the arbitrator could rely on Dr. White s opinion for the time when his benefits were terminated, there was no medical evidence to contradict the opinions of Dr. Donskoy and Dr. Veronica Kekosz, a physiatrist, for the later period. Therefore, he claims that he should be paid weekly income benefits of $600 from April 6, 1996 to August 6, 1996, when he returned to work, and $200 from August 6, 1996 until he has received benefits for a total of 156 weeks. I am unable to accept Mr. Pinto s arguments. Where the insured person s disability cannot be objectively measured, his or her testimony is critical. As I said in Pisani and Simcoe & Erie General Insurance Company and canadian General Insurance Company, (December 11, 1995, OIC P and P ), the arbitrator must consider all the evidence and is not bound by medical opinion, particularly where the opinion is based on incomplete or incorrect information. Unfortunately for Mr. Pinto, the arbitrator found his testimony vague and unconvincing. The decision includes reasons for this assessment that demonstrate a proper consideration of the evidence. Therefore, I find no basis for disturbing the decision. Mr. Pinto specifically objects to the arbitrator s reliance on the fact that no CT scan was done. page 9 of his decision, the arbitrator states: At Lastly, I find it significant that Mr. Pinto failed to undergo a CT scan of the lumbar spine as recommended by an orthopaedic specialist. Dr. White thought that this was necessary, but no one followed through. Mr. Pinto told Dr. Kekosz that he might have a disc problem yet neither Mr. Pinto, Dr. Donskoy, or any of Mr. -4-
6 Pinto s three legal representatives thought his problem serious enough to arrange for the CT scan. Although I found that Mr. Pinto has a high tolerance to pain, in these circumstances where Mr. Pinto is claiming that he is disabled, I conclude that Mr. Pinto s unexplained failure to undergo a CT scan of the lumbar spine tends to show that his physical problems with his hip and thigh are not disabling. In Mr. Pinto s submission, he was under no obligation to follow Dr. White s advice because he was not a treating doctor. However, the arbitrator did not decide against Mr. Pinto simply because he did not have a CT scan done. It was one factor he considered in evaluating Mr. Pinto s testimony about his disability. In my view, it was an appropriate consideration, particularly when the sequence of events is considered. At the time of his accident, Mr. Pinto did not have a family doctor, but was given Dr. Donskoy s name by a friend. He saw Dr. Donskoy on October 14, 15 and 28, General Accident accepted Dr. Donskoy s opinion that Mr. Pinto s return to work was indefinite and began paying weekly income benefits. However, it arranged for him to be assessed by Dr. John Halpenny at Riverfront Medical Evaluation Limited on December 8, Dr. Halpenny felt that Mr. Pinto should continue with active physiotherapy for another three or four weeks and then return to work, even if he still had some residual pain and weakness. Mr. Pinto saw Dr. Donskoy again on December 17 and 23, 1993, but did not return for any further visits until much later. He also discontinued his physiotherapy in January According to the discharge letter, he stopped attending the treatment centre without any explanation. Despite this, Dr. Donskoy did not feel that Mr. Pinto had recovered. In a letter to Mr. Pinto s lawyers, dated February 16, 1994, he disagreed with Dr. Halpenny s opinion: I feel that the patient have [sic] significant soft tissue injuries in his right hip and right low back. Given the patient s findings and the patient s occupation which involve [sic] bending, heavy lifting, standing, carrying materials and squatting, I feel that the patient is not fit to return to his pre accident activities until at least summer
7 General Accident arranged for another assessment at Riverfront Medical Evaluation Limited on March 14, 1994, when Mr. Pinto saw Dr. White, an orthopaedic specialist. Dr. White felt that he might very well have had a L4-5 disc protrusion on the right side with L5 nerve root compression, leaving him with a minimal disability. In Dr. White s opinion, this would not interfere with his ability to return to sedentary or moderate work. Given the heavy demands of Mr. Pinto s pre-accident work, however, he recommended a CT scan to determine if there was a disc lesion. If not, Mr. Pinto could be reassured about returning to work. If the CT scan showed a disc lesion, Dr. White suggested that Mr. Pinto be referred to an orthopaedic surgeon or neurologist for further consultation, although he thought that conservative management would allow Mr. Pinto to return to work in the long term. At Dr. White s suggestion, General Accident sent a copy of his report to Mr. Pinto s lawyers to be forwarded to Dr. Donskoy. However, Mr. Pinto was no longer seeing Dr. Donskoy and nothing was done. I a~ree with the arbitrator that Mr. Pinto s lack of response is significant. Not only did he not have a CT scan done, he did not consult with any doctor or therapist. In addition, there was evidence that he put his name back on the union hiring list during this period, casting further doubt on his claim that he was unable to work. General Accident did not stop paying weekly income benefits after Dr. White s first report. It continued to pay benefits until the summer of 1994, when Dr. Donskoy said Mr. Pinto might be able to return to work. In July 1994, General Accident arranged for a follow-up visit with Dr. White, who found that Mr. Pinto had made an essentially full recovery and could return to his pre-accident work. Based on this report and surveillance evidence, General Accident stopped paying benefits on September 5, There is no basis for criticizing this decision, as there was no medical evidence supporting Mr. Pinto s ongoing entitlement. As stated above, Mr. Pinto did nothing to challenge the decision for 20 months. The gap in his medical treatment was even longer. He did not see Dr. Donskoy from December 1993 to April 1996, a period of 28 months. The arbitrator, quite fairly in my view, was not prepared to infer -6-
8 from this gap in the medical treatment that Mr. Pinto had recovered. However, Mr. Pinto still had to prove his claim. Mr. Pinto relies on the later reports from Dr. Donskoy and Dr. Kekosz, claiming they are uncontradicted by any medical evidence from General Accident. However, these reports are far from conclusive. They do not suggest that Mr. Pinto developed a new problem or had a relapse. Rather, they are based on his complaints of ongoing hip and back pain. These are essentially the same complaints that he made much earlier that no one, including Dr. Donskoy, felt would prevent him from working in the long term. As noted by the arbitrator, Dr. Kekosz does not express any opinion about Mr. Pinto s ability to work. Dr. Donskoy says that he can do modified work with specific restrictions, but provides little explanation why the problems have persisted or why the restrictions are necessary. The arbitrator was obliged to evaluate the new reports along with all the other evidence, particularly Mr. Pinto s own testimony. I am satisfied that he did so, and reached conclusions supported by the evidence. IV. ARBITRATION EXPENSES Prior to November 1, 1996, section 282(11) of the Insurance Act allowed the arbitrator to award expenses to the insured person, but not the insurance company. That was the law when Mr. Pinto decided to apply for arbitration rather than go to court. However, the November 1996 amendments included a new version of section 282(11), allowing the arbitrator to award expenses to the insured person or the insurance company: (11) The arbitrator may award, according to criteria prescribed by the regulations, to the insured person or the insurer, all or part of such expenses incurred in respect of an arbitration proceeding as may be prescribed in the regulations, to the maximum set out in the regulations. ) -7-
9 General Accident submits that because the hearing did not take place until after this amendment came into effect, the arbitrator erred in applying the former expense provisions. In its appeal submissions, General Accident focussed on the arbitrator s use ofjudicial notice. At page 14 of the decision, he states: I take judicial notice of the fact that prior to November 1, 1996, insureds generally chose to refer disputes to arbitration because, among other reasons, they would likely recover expenses at an arbitration at the Ontario Insurance Commission and they would not face the risk of being ordered to pay the insurer s expenses. General Accident contends that this is not a proper subject ofjudicial notice and no evidence was led to support it. For the following reasons, however, I agree with the arbitrator s conclusion whether or not he went beyond the scope of official notice allowed under the Statutoly Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, as amended. Legislation is presumed not to operate retroactively, unless the amendment is merely procedural. I was not referred to any decisions holding that expense provisions are merely procedural. The question, therefore, is whether applying the new version of section 282(11) in this case would be giving it a retroactive application. 1 For example, see Worthman andaxa Insurance (Canada), (January 30, 1997, OIC A ); McLennon and Pilot Insurance C ompany, (August 15, 1997, OIC A ); Mo/ma and Pafco hisurance Company Limited, (August 28, 1997, OIC A ); and Beros andallstate Insurance Company ofcanada, (October 15, 1997, OIC A ). Since the arbitrator s decision, other arbitrators have followed his analysis without exception. Also, in Henriques and Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund, (August 21, 1997, OIC P ), I held that the November 1996 changes to the appeal provisions did not apply to an arbitration proceeding started before the amendments came into effect. -8-
10 I agree with the arbitrator that the amendments must be considered within the particular context of the dispute resolution process. Before any dispute about accident benefits can proceed to adjudication, mediation is required. If the dispute is not resolved through mediation, the insured person can then apply for arbitration or go to court. I see little controversy in the arbitrator s suggestion that cost is one of the factors that an insured person would consider in choosing between the two options. It is a factor whether or not insured persons generally chose arbitration over court due to the greater likelihood that they would recover arbitration expenses. In this case, Mr. Pinto chose arbitration. Based on the law at that time, he could reasonably expect to be awarded his expenses as long as his claim had some merit and he did not act in a manner sufficiently serious to disqualify him. He also did not face any liability for General Accident s expenses beyond the penalty provision in section 282(11.2) of the Insurance Act if his claim was found to be frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process. Mr. Pinto made his choice based on the law in effect at the time and incurred expenses based on that law. Arbitration expenses are not limited to hearing expenses. Preparation is also covered. It is clear that Mr. Pinto had legal expenses, including the pre-hearing conference, before the amendments came into effect. As a result, I agree with the arbitrator that the critical date is the application for arbitration, not the date of the hearing. Finally, even if the new version of section 282(11) applied in this case, expenses remain discretionary. The criteria for awarding expenses are now set out in section 12 of Ontario Regulation 464/96. Paragraph 6 allows the arbitrator to consider any other matter related to the proceeding that the arbitrator considers relevant to the issue of whether an award of expenses is justified. In my opinion, the fact that the arbitration was under way at the time of the amendments would be an appropriate consideration supporting the arbitrator s order. -9-
11 V. APPEAL EXPENSES As stated in many previous decisions, appeal expenses are not awarded on the same basis as arbitration expenses. An unsuccessful appellant may be awarded his or her expenses if the appeal raises an important issue, but it is not a routine order. Expenses have consistently been denied where the appeal involves a mere disagreement with the arbitrator s assessment of the evidence. While I would not suggest that Mr. Pinto s appeal was frivolous or an abuse of process, I am not persuaded that General Accident should be required to fund it. Apart from his own appeal, Mr. Pinto had to respond to General Accident s appeal. I find no reason that he should not recover his expenses as a respondent. Considering the brief submissions made on this issue, I am fixing his expenses at $ ~ /øa~1~~ November 26, 1997 Director s Delegate -10-
DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
BETWEEN: ANDREW ZABOROWSKI Applicant and STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE Before: Heard: By telephone conference call on January 24, 2005. Appearances:
More informationFD: 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 informationNOVA 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 informationDECISION ON A MOTION TO DISMISS
Financial Services Commission of Ontario Commission des services financiers de l Ontario BETWEEN: SERGIY ZAPISNOY Applicant and CERTAS DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION ON A MOTION TO DISMISS Before:
More informationS T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION V DOCKET #96-0235
JEFFREY P. GUERRIERO, PLAINTIFF, 1998 OPINION #301 S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION V DOCKET #96-0235 CENTURY MACHINE INC AND SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.
More informationWORKPLACE 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 informationDECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
BETWEEN: TRACY SCHUTT Applicant and ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA Insurer DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE Before: Heard: Appearances: Joyce Miller Written submissions from both parties were received
More informationSUMMARY 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 informationORDER PO-3571. Appeal PA15-24. Ministry of Community and Social Services. January 28, 2016
ORDER PO-3571 Appeal PA15-24 Ministry of Community and Social Services January 28, 2016 Summary: The ministry received a correction request from the appellant requesting that the ministry correct a 2010
More informationDECISION WITH RESPECT TO PRELIMINARY ISSUE
IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990 c. I.8, as amended AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT, S.O. 1991, c.17, as amended BETWEEN: AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION WAWANESA MUTUAL INSURANCE
More informationWORKPLACE 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 informationNO. 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 informationDECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
Financial Services Commission of Ontario Commission des services financiers de l Ontario BETWEEN: ANDONIETTA ZAYA Applicant and STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY
More informationPractices and Procedures for Appeals under Section 11.1 of the School Act
Practices and Procedures for Appeals under Section 11.1 of the School Act 1 Table of Contents Introduction... 4 PART 1 GENERAL... 5 1. Definitions... 5 2. Communication through Registrar... 5 3. Filing
More informationDECISION WITH RESPECT TO PRELIMINARY ISSUE
IN THE MATTER of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, as amended, section 275; AND IN THE MATTER of the Arbitration Act, S.O. 1991, c. 17; AND IN THE MATTER of an arbitration; B E T W E E N : JEVCO
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JAMES L. MARTIN, Plaintiff Below- Appellant, v. NATIONAL GENERAL ASSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant Below- Appellee. No. 590, 2013 Court Below Superior Court of
More informationWORKERS 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 informationDECISION ON EXPENSES
Financial Services Commission of Ontario Commission des services financiers de l Ontario BETWEEN: BRADLEY MICHAEL MULHALL Applicant and WAWANESA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION ON EXPENSES Before:
More informationBEFORE 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 informationWorkplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division
Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division WHSCRD Case No: 13252-11 WHSCC Claim No.(s): 604016, 611050, 672511 705910, 721783, 731715, 753775, 784014, 831110 Decision Number: 14189 Marlene
More informationIN 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 informationYour Guide to Pursuing a Personal Injury Claim
Your Guide to Pursuing a Personal Injury Claim 2 Contents Introduction... 3 Important things that you must do... 3 In The Beginning... 4 Mitigating your loss... 4 Time limits... 4 Who can claim?... 4 Whose
More informationSUMMARY 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 informationIN THE MATTER of a dispute between The Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company and
IN THE MATTER of a dispute between The Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company and Zurich Canada, pursuant to Regulation 283/95 under the Ontario Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter I.8 as amended;
More informationConcerning the Cap on Pain and Suffering Awards for Minor Injuries
Discussion Paper Concerning the Cap on Pain and Suffering Awards for Minor Injuries Office of the Superintendent of Insurance January, 2010 Introduction The Province of Nova Scotia regulates automobile
More informationS T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION
2008 ACO # 156 S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION MARY A. BUTLER, APPEAL FROM DEPUTY DIRECTOR CZYRKA. HARRY D. HIRSH FOR RICHARD R. WEISER FOR DEFENDANTS ACCIDENT FUND
More informationBEFORE 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 informationIN THE MATTER OF the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.i.8, as amended, and Ontario Regulation 668.
IN THE MATTER OF the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.i.8, as amended, and Ontario Regulation 668. AND IN THE MATTER OF the Arbitration Act, S.O. 1991, c.17 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: STATE
More informationCITATION: Catholic Children s Aid Society of Toronto v. N.B.R., 2013 ONSC 1965 COURT FILE NO.: FS-12-018222 DATE: 2013/04/03
CITATION: Catholic Children s Aid Society of Toronto v. N.B.R., 2013 ONSC 1965 COURT FILE NO.: FS-12-018222 DATE: 2013/04/03 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: Catholic Children s Aid Society of Toronto
More informationA 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 08077 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 08077 03 v.
More informationIN THE PENSION APPEALS BOARD IN RE THE CANADA PENSION PLAN JUDY MANCHUR. - and - MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
IN THE PENSION APPEALS BOARD IN RE THE CANADA PENSION PLAN BETWEEN: JUDY MANCHUR Appellant - and - MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT Respondent Appeal CP08485 heard in Regina, Saskatchewan October
More informationDECISION ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES
BETWEEN: MAURICIO MARIONA Applicant and CANADIAN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES Issues: Mauricio Mariona was injured in a motor vehicle accident on July 17, 1995. He received
More informationFD: 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 informationWORKERS 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 informationWORKPLACE 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 informationWORKCOVER 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 informationWORKPLACE 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 informationWORKERS 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 informationand DECISION ON EXPENSES
FSCO A04 000422 BETWEEN: PHILIP SOOBRIAN Applicant and BELAIR INSURANCE COMPANY INC. Insurer DECISION ON EXPENSES Before: Heard: Appearances: January 27, 2006, at the Offices of the Financial Services
More informationNOTEWORTHY 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 informationSUPREME 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 informationPaper to be delivered at the Law Society of Upper Canada Six-Minute Commercial Leasing Lawyer 2007
PROPERTY TAX UPDATE: CURRENT ISSUES AND DISPUTES Paper to be delivered at the Law Society of Upper Canada Six-Minute Commercial Leasing Lawyer 2007 By: Michael Steinberg February 2007 Michael S. Steinberg
More informationFile No. A-008778 BETWEEN: RUTH ROBERTS Applicant and STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION
File No. A-008778 BETWEEN: RUTH ROBERTS Applicant and STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer DECISION Issues: The Applicant, Ruth Roberts, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on April
More informationWorkplace 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 informationHow To Prove That A Letter Carrier'S Work Caused A Cervical Disc Herniation
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 informationJAMAICA THE HON MR JUSTICE MORRISON JA THE HON MR JUSTICE BROOKS JA THE HON MS JUSTICE LAWRENCE-BESWICK JA (AG) BETWEEN GODFREY THOMPSON APPELLANT
[2014] JMCA Civ 37 JAMAICA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SUPREME COURT CIVIL APPEAL NO 41/2007 BEFORE: THE HON MR JUSTICE MORRISON JA THE HON MR JUSTICE BROOKS JA THE HON MS JUSTICE LAWRENCE-BESWICK JA (AG) BETWEEN
More informationJohn 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 informationRoad to Recovery Rehabilitation following a motor vehicle accident
Road to Recovery Rehabilitation following a motor vehicle accident If you have been injured in a motor vehicle accident, rehabilitation may help you recover and move on with your life. Queensland Compulsory
More informationWORKERS 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 informationAward of Dispute Resolution Professional. Hearing Information
In the Matter of the Arbitration between Allied PT & Acupuncture a/s/o V.B. CLAIMANT(s), Forthright File No: NJ1012001364788 Insurance Claim File No: NJP66574 Claimant Counsel: Pacifico & Lawrence v. Claimant
More informationA Member s Guide to Long Term Disability LTD
A Member s Guide to Long Term Disability LTD Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario January 2012 Long Term Disability Whatever entitlement to benefits you have is based on the language of the Long Term
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS NAZHAT BAHRI, and Plaintiff, DR. LABEED NOURI and DR. NAZIH ISKANDER, UNPUBLISHED October 9, 2014 APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION December 9, 2014 9:15 a.m. Intervening Plaintiffs-Appellants,
More informationILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS
ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Appellate Court Hart v. Kieu Le, 2013 IL App (2d) 121380 Appellate Court Caption LYNETTE Y. HART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOAN KIEU LE, Defendant-Appellee. District & No. Second
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
2001 ONWSIAT 2499 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 398 01 [1] This appeal was heard in Toronto on February 16, 2001 by Tribunal Vice-Chair E.J. Sajtos. THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS
More informationBEFORE 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 informationNO. COA09-986 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 20 July 2010
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 informationCITATION: 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 informationTHE MAJOR IMPACT OF THE NEW MINOR INJURIES CATEGORY
THE MAJOR IMPACT OF THE NEW MINOR INJURIES CATEGORY By Cary N. Schneider September, 2010 VOL. 4, ISSUE 4 Cary N. Schneider is a partner at Beard Winter LLP who specializes in accident benefit and tort
More informationClaims Assessment and Resolution Service Assessor Guidance Material
Claims Assessment and Resolution Service Assessor Guidance Material Costs regulation 2015 Disclaimer This publication contains information about claims assessments under the NSW Compulsory Third party
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-12-00561-CV. ROBERT MILLER, Appellant V. MATTHEW AARON CHURCHES, Appellee
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed December 11, 2013. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00561-CV ROBERT MILLER, Appellant V. MATTHEW AARON CHURCHES, Appellee On Appeal from the
More informationGeneral Information on Representing Yourself in a Workers Compensation Case
General Information on Representing Yourself in a Workers Compensation Case Idaho Industrial Commission PO Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0041 Telephone: (208) 334-6000 Fax: (208) 332-7558 www.iic.idaho.gov
More informationWORKPLACE 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 informationCommonwealth 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 informationSUMMARY 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 informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT APPELLATE DIVISION ROBERT BUELL ) ) VS. ) W.C.C. 03-00724 ) COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES ) DECISION OF THE APPELLATE
More informationPRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR LOW VALUE PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS IN ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS FROM 31 JULY 2013
PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR LOW VALUE PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS IN ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS FROM 31 JULY 2013 Title Number I INTRODUCTION Definitions Para 1.1 Preamble Para 2.1 Aims Para 3.1 Scope Para 4.1 II GENERAL
More informationCesar Molina: The Making of a Mattress Builder
BETWEEN: CESAR MOLINA Applicant and PAFCO INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Insurer DECISION Issues: Cesar Molina claims he was injured in two motor vehicle accidents on July 17, 1995 and April 22, 1996. He received
More informationBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G405820. LINDA BECKER, Employee. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G405820 LINDA BECKER, Employee GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, Employer RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED
More informationRE: HF No. 173, 2009/10 Gary Timm v. Meade School District 46-1 and Associated School Boards of South Dakota Worker s Compensation Trust Fund
March 29, 2011 James D. Leach Attorney at Law 1617 Sheridan Lake Road Rapid City, SD 57702-3783 Jessica L. Filler Tieszen Law Office Prof. LLC PO Box 550 Pierre, SD 57501 Letter Decision and Order RE:
More informationWorkers Compensation Amendment (Transitional) Regulation 2012
New South Wales Workers Compensation Amendment (Transitional) Regulation 2012 under the Workers Compensation Act 1987 Her Excellency the Governor, with the advice of the Executive Council, has made the
More informationAccident Benefit. Significant Legal Decisions. In this issue of the Accident Benefit Reporter, we are pleased to provide a review and summary of
Accident Benefit R E P O R T E R Significant Legal Decisions Year 2000 in Review In this issue: Significant Legal Decisions Year 2000 in Review Leonard Kunka Partner A Thomson, Rogers Publication Volume
More informationBEFORE 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(3) provide certainty around cost and payment for insurers and regulated health professionals;
Welcome to the World of the SABS - Out with the PAF in with the MIG: A review of the Application of the Minor Injury Guideline in SABS Claims by Marie T. Clemens On September 1, 2010, Ontario Regulation
More informationWorkplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division
Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division WHSCRD Case No: 13277-12 WHSCC Claim No: 633272 Decision Number: 14132 Lloyd Piercey Review Commissioner The Review Proceedings 1. The review took
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: Bagasbas v. Atwal, 2009 BCSC 512 Myla Bagasbas Date: 20090416 Docket: M081193 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiff And Gursimran Atwal and Sarbjit Atwal
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Appellant: [X] (Worker) Participants entitled to respond to this appeal: [X] (Employer) and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) APPEAL
More informationCASE ID # [personal information] WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND DECISION #7
C A N A D A CASE ID # [personal information] PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: WORKER APPELLANT AND: WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RESPONDENT
More informationILARS POLICY Funding of applications by injured workers to pursue claims for compensation
ILARS POLICY Funding of applications by injured workers to pursue claims for compensation Introduction This WIRO Policy sets out the circumstances in which the Independent Legal Assistance and Review Service
More informationGovernment Gazette OF THE STATE OF
4315 Government Gazette OF THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES Number 125 Tuesday, 8 October 2013 Published under authority by the Department of Premier and Cabinet SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT Guidelines for Work Capacity
More informationNoteworthy Decision Summary. Decision: WCAT 2003-04102 Panel: Randy Lane Decision Date: December 11, 2003
Noteworthy Decision Summary Decision: WCAT 2003-04102 Panel: Randy Lane Decision Date: December 11, 2003 Termination of wage-loss benefits When is a worker s condition stabilized Applying policy item #34.54
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Continental Tire of the Americas, LLC v. Illinois Workers Compensation Comm n, 2015 IL App (5th) 140445WC Appellate Court Caption CONTINENTAL TIRE OF THE AMERICAS,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV 2003-485-1921. BETWEEN VERONICA WEIR Appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV 2003-485-1921 BETWEEN VERONICA WEIR Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 15 July 2004 Appearances: J Miller & S A
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION LOUISE FOSTER Administrator of the : AUGUST TERM 2010 Estate of GEORGE FOSTER : and BARBARA DILL : vs.
More informationSUMMARY DECISION NO. 1076/98I. Waiver (right to compensation) (settlement).
SUMMARY DECISION NO. 1076/98I Waiver (right to compensation) (settlement). The worker and employer both appealed decisions of the Board regarding ongoing benefits and VR services. After following grievance
More informationSTATE 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 informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Carmelo Olivares Hernandez, No. 2305 C.D. 2014 Petitioner Submitted May 15, 2015 v. Workers Compensation Appeal Board (Giorgio Foods, Inc.), Respondent BEFORE
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Appellant: [X] (Worker) Participants entitled to respond to this appeal: [X] (Employer) and Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) APPEAL DECISION
More informationWorkers Compensation Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulation 2006
No 656 New South Wales Workers Compensation Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulation under the Workers Compensation Act 1987 and Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 Her
More informationBEFORE 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 informationIN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. 1.8, AS AMENDED AND REGULATION 283/95 MADE UNDER THE INSURANCE ACT
IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. 1.8, AS AMENDED AND REGULATION 283/95 MADE UNDER THE INSURANCE ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT S.O. 1991, c. 17 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. DISTRICT COURT SIXTH DIVISION THOMAS A. PALANGIO D/B/A : CONSUMER AUTO SALES : : v. : A.A. No. 11-093 : DAVID M. SULLIVAN, TAX : ADMINISTRATOR
More informationThe Worker sought compensation under the new Chronic Pain Regulations. This led to the following two decisions:
CLAIM HISTORY AND APPEAL PROCEEDINGS: On August 30, 1983, the Worker* injured his lower back while lifting an arch rail. The Board accepted his claim and provided him with 22 weeks of temporary benefits
More informationEvidence and Practice Tips By: Joseph G. Feehan Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen, P.C., Peoria
Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel Springfield, Illinois www.iadtc.org 800-232-0169 IDC Quarterly Volume 21, Number 3 (21.3.45) Evidence and Practice Tips By: Joseph G. Feehan Heyl, Royster,
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Appellant: [X] (Worker) Participants entitled to respond to this appeal: [X] (Employer) and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) APPEAL
More informationBEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION CARL C. WEBSTER ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 233,685 CORBIN FISH FARM ) Respondent ) AND ) ) FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE ) Insurance
More informationOffice of the Attorney General. Idaho Lemon Law. LAWRENCE WASDEN Attorney General 700 West Jefferson Street Boise, ID 83720-0010 www.ag.idaho.
Office of the Attorney General Idaho Lemon Law LAWRENCE WASDEN Attorney General 700 West Jefferson Street Boise, ID 83720-0010 www.ag.idaho.gov State of Idaho Office of Attorney General Lawrence Wasden
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 193/14
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 193/14 BEFORE: C. M. MacAdam : Vice-Chair J. Blogg : Member Representative of Employers A. Grande : Member Representative of Workers HEARING:
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Appellant: [X] (Worker) Participants entitled to respond to this appeal: The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) APPEAL DECISION Representative:
More information