Mark Kahn Comments on the Law
In the case law summaries, the author has attempted to present an accurate summary of each case. However, the summaries are dependent on the interpretation of the author, and cases are often subject to more than one interpretation. It is the responsibility of the reader to review the cases before citing them as authority since summaries may contain errors. Never cite a case as authority unless the person citing the case has read the actual case and checked the subsequent case history, as cases are subject to being revised by the WCAB or the courts after publication of the case summary. Any reliance you place on the case law summaries is therefore strictly at your own risk.
Mark's Current Comments

Mark Kahn
Mark's Prior Comments
APPORTIONMENT
DATE OF INJURY LABOR CODE §5412 & LABOR CODE §5500.5
DISCOVERY/TRIAL PROCEDURE
DISMISSAL
EMPLOYMENT
EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE/INTERPRETERS
INJURY AOE-COE
LIENS
MEDICAL TREATMENT/UTILIZATION REVIEW
PERMANENT DISABILITY
PSYCHIATRIC INJURY
QME/AME PROCEDURE
RECONSIDERATION
SIBTF
SJDB BENEFITS
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS/JURISDICTION
STIPULATIONS/SETTLEMENTS
TEMPORARY DISABILITY
Articles coming soon
- WCJ failed to follow proper procedure re disclosure of exhibits and witnesses when parties failed to complete the PTCS at MSC.
- WCJ failed to follow proper procedure re disclosure of exhibits and witnesses when parties failed to complete the PTCS at MSC.
Articles coming soon
Articles coming soon
Articles coming soon
Articles coming soon
- Diagnostic testing not subject to utilization review when found to be medical-legal services.
- Applicant not entitled to new primary treating physician within an MPN when treating PTP within the MPN discharged her as cured with no permanent impairment, work restrictions or need for future medical care.
- Reimbursement for cost of travel to California for medical care held compensable.
- An MPN IMR's evaluation could be used to assess whether an applicant was entitled to a left hip biopsy surgery to remove a hip mass.
Articles coming soon
- Applicant entitled to an additional QME panel in internal medicine when the orthopedic QME testified that it would be appropriate for an internist or appropriate specialist to evaluate him.
- Applicant entitled to a new QME, pursuant to Navarro, even though he returned to the original QME after filing a new claim.
- Defendant allowed to forward sub rosa video to a QME and that the applicant did not have a right to production of defendant's sub rosa investigator’s report.
- AME's reports would remain in evidence even though the examiner had to be replaced because he was no longer available for additional reporting or cross-examination.
- Applicant, who claimed a single cumulative trauma injury while working for two different employers, was entitled to obtain a QME panel against each of the employers when she had not made an election pursuant to LC §5500.5(c).
- Applicant’s request for a QME panel was invalid when it was simultaneously served with a Claim Form.
Articles coming soon
Articles coming soon
Articles coming soon
