Skip to Content

Category Archives: Worker’s Compensation

WCA Hails Budget Agreement

Written on March 25, 2013 at 8:45 pm, by

New York, NY – Mar. 25, 2013 — The New York Workers’ Compensation Alliance, a coalition of injured workers and those committed to protecting the rights of injured workers, today praised Governor Andrew Cuomo and legislative leaders for working together to agree on a budget that will create administrative efficiency, and control costs for employers  Continue Reading »

Yesterday the Court decided 6 cases dealing with workers compensation cases.

Written on March 22, 2013 at 3:36 pm, by

In Matter of Swanko , Appeal from an amended decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed November 7, 2011, which, among other things, ruled that apportionment pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 44 is not applicable to claimant’s workers’ compensation award. Claimant was employed for many years as a carpenter. Late in 2005, injuries to  Continue Reading »

Auqui v. Seven Thirty One Ltd. Partnership

Written on February 22, 2013 at 8:13 pm, by

Decided on February 14, 2013 The Court of Appeals has ruled that a factual finding in a workers’ compensation case is binding upon a claimant in other litigation. In this case a “trial” at the Workers’ Compensation Board resulted in a finding of no further causally related disability. In addition to the workers’ compensation claim  Continue Reading »

2013 legislative changes to Workers Compensation

Written on January 29, 2013 at 5:37 pm, by

Some highlights: 1.    Special Funds Conservation Committee eliminated. 2.    Minimum rate increase to $150.00 per week for accidents on or after 5-1-13, without indexing. 3.    Looks like there is an attempt to limit the time to file for discretionary Full Board Review to 30 days, yet nothing in the proposed amendments to §23 bars the  Continue Reading »

Final Cases of 2012:

Written on December 27, 2012 at 6:34 pm, by

The City of New York objected to another decision directing them to pay an out of network provider at the same rate that they had contracted for with their provider network. This decision is in accordance with the decision from a few weeks ago on the same issue. There may be more of these cases  Continue Reading »