Let's see... "TAX+" or "TAX-"

Here’s a pro-tip for you Applicant attorneys.  Some insurance companies and TPA’s are actually unable to issue payments to entities unless they have their Tax ID number.  Making it easy for defendants to issue payment means you’ll get paid sooner.[1]

Here are the top three ways to get paid sooner:

• Put your Tax ID number on the settlement documents
• Put your Tax ID number on your website
• Make sure your receptionist has your Tax ID number ready to give out
• Put your Tax ID number in your automated voice mail message

1. Photo courtesy of Phillip

Talk to your doctor about how you can save 15% or more on your reptile dysfunction medication

A friend of mine is an Applicant’s attorney who uses dictation software with his work computer. [1] As you may know, dictation and voice recognition software is pretty good – but it is not always successful.  My friend, I’ll call him “Tom,”[2] was sending an e-mail demand for medication to a defense attorney using his dictation software.  The software got the phrase wrong, but given that the result was extremely entertaining, he sent it anyway.

What was his demand, you may ask?

Medication for his client’s “reptile dysfunction.” [3]

1. Photo courtesy of dmuphotography
2. After all, that is his name…
3. Other possible names for this post:
   • I got 99 problems, and a reptile ain’t one
   • Reptile problems
   • What do Bob Dole and the Geiko gekko have in common?

Look up! Dates!

A few weeks ago I e-mailed an Applicant attorney friend of mine[1] and got back a one word response.  I jokingly chided him for being so chatty.  His response was thus:

No new blog = minimal response

Well, for Z and everyone else out there, here’s a new blog post![2]  Over the weekend I updated several aspects of the website. [3]  Here’s a short summary:

1. Updated MPN / Medical Provider Lists.  I’ve added a lot more MPN names, links, and passwords.  If you have some new ones, please send them over.  I’ve also improved the link structure to help prevent broken links.
2. Updated workers’ compensation calculators.  I’ve added a few small features that should make the calculators work a little better.
3. Improved site speed.  I’ve added a little extra website-internet-magic-mojo that should improve the entire site’s performance.
4. Something new!  I’m working on a brand new calculator.  If you like playing with calculators, kicking-tires, and dishing out criticism, drop me a line and ask to be a beta tester.
5. Finally, if you see any weirdness over the next few days, please drop me a line and let me know so I can take care of it!

But, enough about me!  How are you?

1. I’ll call him “Z.”
2. There are two kinds of blog posts I really hate to read.  Blog posts that apologize for infrequent posting and blog posts that talk about the frequency of blog posts.
3. Photo courtesy of Agent Smith

It's been a wild ride

Just over a month after oral argument the Court of Appeal has issued their ruling, reversing the en banc decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, annulled the award of permanent disability to Ms. Ogilvie, and remanding the case for further proceedings. [1]

So, what does this new Ogilvie decision mean for us?

1. The calculations from the en banc decisions of Ogilvie I/II are no longer valid.
2. An injured worker can still rebut a scheduled rating in accordance with Costa v. Hardy and L.C. 4660 .
3. An injured worker may rebut a scheduled rating in one of three ways:
   1. Demonstrating “a factual error in the application of a formula or the preparation of the schedule.”  (Ogilvie III, p10-11).  Given the examples provided, probably references proving a defect in the RAND Study 2003 itself.
   2. Demonstrating impairments via LeBoeuf v. W.C.A.B. -style analysis that “the employee will have a greater loss of future earnings than reflected in a rating because, due to the industrial injury, the employee is not amenable to rehabilitation.”  (Ogilvie III, p12).  However, the increased disability must not be “due to nonindustrial factors such as general economic conditions, illiteracy, proficiency to speak English, or an employee’s lack of education.”
   3. Demonstrating “the claimant’s disability has been aggravated by complications not considered within the sampling used to compute the adjustment factor.”  (Ogilvie III, p13).  This appears to be a two-step process of having to prove a complex injury and then proving that the sample for the adjustment factor didn’t account for such injuries or complications.

Download Ogilvie v. City and County of San Francisco, Court of Appeal, A126344, A126427 aka Ogilvie III right now!

1. Photo courtesy of mpieracci

Boot Camp

The Workers’ Compensation Specialization Boot Camp on July 16 and 17 in Los Angeles was a packed house. [1]  If you missed out, there’s another chance to attend on July 30 and 31 in Concord.

If you did attend the seminar in Los Angeles, I promised you a copy of all of the cases cited during the presentation on Permanent Disability.  Here’s the basic outline along with a download link for every case I cited:

1. Permanent Disability
   1. Cal. Labor Code. Section 4660
   2. LeBoeuf v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd.
   3. Costa v. Hardy
   4. Almaraz/Guzman “II”
   5. Guzman “III”
   6. Ogilvie “II”
   7. (Updated 7/29/2011!) Ogilvie v. City and County of San Francisco, Court of Appeal, A126344, A126427
      1. Read a summary of Ogilvie III here!
   8. Argonaut Ins. v. Ind. Acc. Comm (Montana)
2. Psychiatric Injuries
   1. Cal. Labor Code Section 3208.3
   2. Dept. of Corrections v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Garcia)
3. Apportionment
   1. Cal. Labor Code Section 4662
   2. Cal. Labor Code Section 4663
   3. Cal. Labor Code Section 4664
   4. Cal. Labor Code Section 3213 – 3213.2
   5. Escobedo v. Marshall’s
   6. Benson v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd.
   7. Brodie / Welcher
4. Rating
   1. Blackledge v. Bank of America
   2. Policy & Procedures Manual of the WCAB
5. (Updated 7/18/2011!) Flash Card Take Away
   1. Please register for a free account with PDRater.com to download this file.
   2. Seriously – free as in free.  There’s no charge, no credit card anything.

1. Photo courtesy of jumpinjimmyjava

Math: The best kind of witness

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on a 10 year old sexual discrimination law suit brought against Wal-Mart.[1]  I was listening to a summary of the oral argument yesterday when I heard this:

Scalia added that if statistical models can replace witnesses and evidence, “we must have a pretty bad judicial system.”

I was driving at the time just about lost it.  Replacing witnesses and evidence with statistical models?  Oh, Judge Scalia, you’ve clearly never practiced in Workers’ Compensation…

1. Photo courtesy of colodio

Now THAT's an old schedule case!

I heard the best workers’ compensation joke yesterday. [1]  Here goes:

• “Is this an old or new schedule case?”
• “Of course it’s old schedule.  Just look how old it is!”

1. Photo courtesy of dklimke

What has two thumbs and loves to hear itself talk? THIS GUY!!!

There was a great turn out this morning to the “How to Obtain an Accurate PD Rating with the AMA Guides” put on by the Workers’ Compensation Section of the State Bar.  We covered a lot of ground in just two hours, from the DEU perspective presented by Annalisa Faina and Barry Knight entitled “Anatomy of Rating”, to Mark Gearheart’s “Substantial Medical Evidence to Support a Permanent Disability Rating,” and my own presentation on “Litigating Ogilvie.”  There was a lively discussion on the state of Almaraz/Guzman, Blackledge, and Ogilvie. [1][2]

Thanks to everyone who e-mailed me asking for the cases cited during our presentations.  I’ll be uploading them shortly.

Tonight is the “2010 Steve Jimenez Special Recognition Awards” honoring:

• Lifetime Achievement: The Honorable Pamela Foust (Ret.)
• Judge of the Year: The Honorable Jorja FrankHon. Jorja Frank
• Applicant Attorney of the Year: Marc Marcus
• Defense Attorney of the Year: Michael Marks

If you’re attending tonight, please stop me and say hello!  (I’ve got a name tag and everything)

1. Lively as in “barely civil”
2. I’m kidding!

You'd have to know the theme song to really get it...

You’ll understand the title in just a moment…

For the last few months my laptop has been in bad shape.  Such bad shape I’ve been using a backup laptop. [1]  Something on my laptop’s motherboard went bad and killed the battery. [2][3]  I could still use it – but I had to keep it plugged in all the time.  If I needed to move it, I had to shut it down all the way, move it, then boot it up – since it had no battery life at all.

Well, Dell’s kick ass incredible customer service took care of me – once again.  I can’t thank these guys enough for going above and beyond.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, my next laptop is going to be a Dell. Thanks to Lionel my laptop is sporting a totally brand-spanking new motherboard and power cord.  I’ve also just slapped in a totally new battery as well.

Anyhow, I’m beyond happy. [4]

1. Trust me, the back up laptop is nothing to brag about.
2. You see, the motherboard – it went bad.  It was one bad mother…  Oh, forget it.
3. The photo does not belong to me and is probably the property of MGM.
4. Yes, yes, I’m a nerd – whatever.

Three doctors is probably just plain excessive. And more than a little creepy.

My prior record for doctor depositions was three in one month.  This was not at all intentional.  It was probably a number of factors.  I tend to take more doctor depositions than most.[1] Almaraz/Guzman issues are usually best addressed during a deposition.  And, lastly it just happened to be an extra busy month.

This week I attended three doctor depositions (two set by myself, one set by a co-defendant).  I’d say that pretty well trumps three in a month.  :)

A special shout-out goes to Doctors Z, J, and C.  Thanks for putting up with me guys.  Also, special thanks to Mr. W, my co-Defendant without whom this wouldn’t have been possible.

1. Photo courtesy of Little Miss no Name.  Photo editing – all me!

The end for Milpitas USD?

Update: Download Milpitas United School District v. WCAB and Guzman, 6th Appellate District Court H034853, ADJ3341185, SJO0254688!

Looks like Milpitas Unified School District v. WCAB and Guzman is here to stay. [1] The 6th Appellate Court has just affirmed the WCAB’s decision in full.

Where does this leave us?  Well, under “Almaraz/Guzman II” we need to get a “strict AMA” and either side can obtain an “Almaraz/Guzman II” opinion from the doctors based upon rebuttal evidence, with the Judge being the final arbiter.

What else does this mean?  I’m probably going to break my personal record for the most doctor depositions in a single month.

Click here for more in depth coverage of Guzman!

1. Photo courtesy of funkandjazz

Back in Sac!

I’m at the Sacramento WCAB this morning, so why not stop me and say hello?

Favorite deposition question: Doctor who?

For those of you keeping score at home, I’ve posted my personal records for the most walk throughs at different Boards in one day (3), most bridges crossed in one day (3), most bridge tolls paid in one day ($10), most bridges crossed without paying tolls legally (2), and now… depositions of doctors.[1]

I probably tend to take more doctor depositions than most.  I’ve normally got about one or two on calendar each month.  However, this month has been a personal record with three depositions of doctors.[2]

I seriously doubt any other workers’ comp attorneys keep track of this sort of thing.

1. Photo courtesy of BBC and TVScoop
2. Does this count as a professional record?

There now, don't you feel better?

Psychologists at the University of Minnesota have discovered that thinking about money, such as counting out bills, actually reduces peoples’ perception of pain. [1]  They also discovered the opposite holds true – being reminded of money you do not have increases the perception of pain.  But, here’s the really wild part – even “[m]erely touching cash or even staring at a money-filled screensaver could blunt the impact of hard or painful events.” [2]

Modified duty as a cashier just got a lot more interesting.

1. Photo courtesy of sam b-r
2. Thanks slashdot!

1. Ogilvie Formula
   1. Ogilvie formula (longhand)
      1. Each of the steps in the Ogilvie formula explained
   2. Ogilvie formula (shorthand)
      1. Mathematical proof demonstrating a simplified Ogilvie formula
      2. Download the simplified Ogilvie mathematical proof as a PDF here
   3. Ogilvie formula (oversimplified)
      1. Learn how to perform an Ogilvie calculation in your head in 5 minutes (PDF download)
   4. Ogilvie formula (18 point rule)
      1. Read the Ogilvie “18 point rule”
      2. Download the Ogilvie “18 point rule” as a handy PDF
2. Ogilvie Case Law
   1. Ogilvie v. WCAB I (en banc) 2/3/2009
   2. Ogilvie v. WCAB II (en banc) 9/3/2009
   3. Bowden v. Sunray Termite San Jose WCAB Panel Decision ADJ4536632
      • Commissioner Miller letter dated 1/13/2010 to Defense attorney on Bowden v Sunray Termite
   4. Shini v. Pacific Coast Auto Body & Truck San Diego WCAB Panel Decision ADJ2079252 (1/25/2010)
   5. Ochoa v. UPS Ground Freight Order Denying and Report and Recommendation on Reconsideration ADJ1758338 (2/8/2010)
   6. Bertha Noriega Garcia v. Patrick L. Hinrichsen WCAB Panel Decision ADJ6721939 (3/1/2010)
3. Litigating Ogilvie
   1. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Ind. Acc. Com. (Montana) (1962) 57 Cal.2d 589
4. Applicant Attorney Ogilvie Handbook
5. Defense Attorney Ogilvie Handbook
6. Appendix
   1. EDD Labor Market Information Division
   2. Cal. Labor Code § 4651 “Average annual earnings shall be taken as fifty-two times the average weekly earnings referred to in this chapter.”

Sample Ogilvie DFEC analysis brief, complete with citations, explanations, and exhibits

Old Town Salinas

I’ve got a hearing at the WCAB in Salinas this morning.

If you’re around this morning, stop me and say hello!

Ye olde cell fone

Here’s some trivia for you.  I have the world’s crappiest cell phone.  I get a lot of flack for my cell phone.  It’s beat to hell, got a cracked screen, dented, scratched, and it’s ridiculously old.

How old?  Well, March 15 will be the six year anniversary of the FCC’s acceptance.  My cell carrier has been sending me ever more frantic flyers for the latest cell phones for about four years now.  It’s gotten pretty pathetic, really.

Unfortunately my trusty phone is now taking it’s last gasps and I need to find a replacement.  :(

Almarez/Guzman: Full steam ahead

Yesterday the 6th Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal issued a Writ of Review, denied Defendants’ request for a stay, and indicated that the matter would be set for oral argument. [1]  If you would rather just read what they have to say, here it goes:

Petitioner’s request for a stay is denied. Petitioner’s request for judicial notice, filed on 10/16/09 is denied. The petition for writ of review is granted as follows: Let a writ of review issue ordering the WCAB to certify & return to this court is official record in Guzman v. Milpitas Unified School District & Keenan & Associates, WCAB case No. ADJ3341185 (SJO0254688), not later than 3/25/10. Respondents may file opposition on 3/25/10. Petitioners my reply to the opposition in 20 days after the opposition is filed in this court. The matter will be placed on calendar at a time & place to be specified by court order. Any party desiring oral argument shall so inform this court in writing on 3/25/10 by completing & returning to this court the attached “request for oral argument” form (P, E, WD)

What does this mean for you?  Well, it means at least another four months of Almarez/Guzman II.

The fastest I recall a case going from the granting of a Writ of Review to to Order after oral argument was about four months.  In that case (Rollick) the Court of Appeals had basically already made up their minds about the issues and had allotted each side 10 minutes of argument.  The oral argument in that case took place about four months after the Writ was granted and Order issued almost immediately after argument.  However, the issues presented by Almarez/Guzman II are considerably more intricate.

For more analysis on this decision check out the article on WCExec!

1. Photo courtesy of jjjohn.

Driving under the influence

Yesterday I was driving back from Modesto and I noticed a CHP officer out of the corner of my eye. [1]  My first instinct is always to double check my speed.

However, yesterday afternoon I noticed this officer was on his cell, left elbow propped up on the edge of the window, yakking away, while tailgating a semi in the slow lane.

Not wanting to get pulled over for driving under the influence of irony, I didn’t take a picture with my phone.

BTW, I’ve got to be in San Francisco this afternoon – stop me and say hello!

1. Photo courtesy of OregonDOT

Free pass

Yesterday I had an appearance in San Jose and then another up in San Rafael.  From San Jose I drove up through San Francisco, northbound over the Golden Gate Bridge, to my appearance, then back over to Contra Costa County via the Richmond Bridge.[1]

Wait for it…

The Golden Gate is only toll southbound and the Richmond is only toll westbound.  I traveled over two bridges and didn’t pay a single toll!

1. Photo courtesy of worldsurfer