Video: What Do Virtual Hearings Mean for You?

New York is replacing in-person hearings with “Virtual Hearings” held via web conference. LOIS Attorneys Tashia Rasul, Esq., Declan Gourley, Esq., and Christian Sison, Esq., discuss the impact of virtual hearings in New York workers’ compensation claims, particularly in regards to what this means for claims handling, claim defense, and costs.


Continue reading Video: What Do Virtual Hearings Mean for You?

New Board Panel Decision on Pre-Hearing Conference Statements

Lois Law Firm obtained a Board Panel Decision on May 11, 2018 affirming the law judge’s decision to disallow a claim on the substantive merits of the claim, but the Board also (for the first time) specifically ruled that the employer’s Pre-hearing Conference Statement was sufficient on its face to assert and maintain all defenses. In addition, the Board also determined that the PH-16.2, as submitted, was sufficient to permit the production of an employer witness that was not specifically requested in the PH-16.2.

Download the full decision here: Pabon v. Crown Energy (47 downloads)

#DFD1: Third Fridays Podcast


For the first time in the show’s history, Third Fridays podcast host Christian Sison comes to you live and without any guests. The topic is #DefendFromDay1, and the show focuses on how the movement began, how it can be currently implemented, and how we can use it for the future.

Within the construct of #DFD1, Christian reviews a recent Appellate Division case involving conflicting medical testimony on the causal relationship of a requested surgery. In analyzing the Court’s decision, it becomes clear that #DFD1 strategies would have best been used to procure an IME report much sooner and with the benefit of the pre-accident records. As to the future, Christian projects an interesting possibility as to how the Board may use medical records and testimony, in light of its recent trend towards efficiency and expediency.
Continue reading #DFD1: Third Fridays Podcast

The Statute of Limitations in New Jersey Medical Provider Claims

The Division Of Workers’ Compensation’s jurisdiction includes medical fee disputes arising from New Jersey workers’ compensation claims.N.J.S.A. 34:15-15 states:
“Exclusive jurisdiction for any disputed medical charge arising from any claim for compensation for a work-related injury or illness shall be vested in the division.”
As evidenced by its situation inside of the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation section of the New Jersey Labor Statute, this provision is meant to apply to all New Jersey Workers’ Compensation claims.

Prior to the November 19, 2012 amendment to the New Jersey Workers Compensation Act (N.J.S.A. 34:15-15), the statue of limitations for fee disputes was set by N.J.S.A. 2A:14-1 as per Medical Diagnostic Assocs. v. Hawryluk, 317 N.J. Super. 338, 349 (App. Div. 1998), cert. denied, 160 N.J. 89 (1999). Under N.J.S.A. 2A:14-1, recovery upon a contractual claim or liability, express or implied, not under seal, or upon an account other than one which concerns the trade or merchandise between merchant and merchant, their factors, agents and servants, shall be commenced within 6 years next after the cause of any such action shall have accrued.” Continue reading The Statute of Limitations in New Jersey Medical Provider Claims

Defending Employers