2009 Workers' Compensation Overview
•
1 like•1,018 views
This presentation was given on 9/18/2009 to clients and friends of Kegler Brown. The presentation features a case law update, third party administration, bureau of workers' compensation issues and voluntary abandonment.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to 2009 Workers' Compensation Overview
Similar to 2009 Workers' Compensation Overview (20)
More from Kegler Brown Hill + Ritter
More from Kegler Brown Hill + Ritter (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
2009 Workers' Compensation Overview
- 1. Welcome!
- 13. presented by Randy Mikes September 18, 2009 Voluntary Abandonment: Legal Relic or Valid Defense?
- 26. 2008-2009 Workers Compensation Case Law Update Brendan P. Feheley, Esq. [email_address] (614) 462-5482
- 52. presented by Dave McCarty September 18, 2009 So You Wanna Settle that Workers’ Comp Claim and Move On?
- 53. Why Are We Talking About Settlements?
- 54. Wise v. Ryan (April 2008)
- 67. Some self-insured employers have decided to "comply" with 4123.65(A) requirement just in case.
- 69. SO -- How has the Bureau reacted to the Wise decision with regard to settlement of state-funded claims?
- 70. MELTDOWN!!!
- 74. Any Questions, Comments or Concerns?
- 75. The Latest and Greatest in Third Party Administration Presented by: Jim Vassar V&A Risk Services
- 79. TPA as an Educator/Advisor: BWC Programs
- 90. Changes for Next Policy Year 2011
- 93. Q&A
Editor's Notes
- payment shall not be made for the period when any employee has returned to work, when an employee’s treating physician has made a written statement that the employee is capable of returning to the employee’s former position of employment, when work within the physical capabilities of the employee is made available by the employer or another employer, or when the employee has reached the maximum medical improvement.
- Ohio Admin. Code 4123:1-5-05(D)(2) requires requires an employer to supply a device to lock a machine's controls in the off position when machines are shut down for repair, adjusting, or cleaning.
- The Company argued the Commission could not rely on post accident evidence that the alarm did not work, especially considering the OSHA investigation had determined that the alarm may have been broken during the attempted rescue. that it was no abuse of discretion to deny the employer's rehearing motion claiming its "first-time failure" defense was not considered, because it never raised the defense before a hearing officer, so the commission could not be compelled to grant an appeal in order to consider it.