Elizabeth P. Weeden Named "Lawyer of the Year" in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©

Elizabeth P. Weeden Named “Lawyer of the Year” in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©

Elizabeth P. Weeden Named "Lawyer of the Year" in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©
Perez Morris is proud to announce that Elizabeth P. Weeden has been honored as “Lawyer of the Year” in Columbus, Ohio, in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©. This prestigious recognition in the field of Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers is a testament to Beth’s outstanding work and dedication to her clients. Beth represents employers in all administrative hearings before the Industrial Commission of Ohio and the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation. She frequently speaks on workers’ compensation issues and educates employers on supervisory tactics for successfully defending workers’ compensation claims.

The “Lawyer of the Year” accolade is awarded to individual lawyers who receive the highest overall peer-feedback in a specific practice area and geographic region.

Congratulations, Beth!

AutoZone exterior shot

Post AutoZone: The New Analysis of Entitlement to TTD under ORC 4123.56(F)

AutoZone exterior shot

Over the last 25 years, since the decision in Louisiana Pacific (1995), Ohio courts have defined and redefined the concept of voluntary abandonment and its effect on the payment of temporary total compensation in a claim, based on specific facts and circumstances where the injured worker may have been terminated for cause or voluntarily left the workforce. However, all of this changed in September 2020 when the Ohio legislature amended ORC 4123.56(F) which eliminated the concept of voluntary abandonment. All prior caselaw which applied the concept of voluntary abandonment was wiped clean.

The legislative change in ORC 4123.56(F) raised many questions for both injured workers’ and employers as to how ORC 4123.56(F) would be applied. In the first major pronouncement on this issue, the 10th District issued a decision which significantly limits an employer’s ability to argue against the payment of temporary total compensation in certain circumstances. State ex rel. AutoZone Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Commission, 2023-Ohio-633 (March 2, 2023). The Court’s decision in AutoZone sets forth a new analysis necessary to determine eligibility for temporary total compensation.

In AutoZone, the injured worker had an allowed shoulder claim and was working light duty. He was terminated after an altercation with a co-worker and thereafter requested a period of TTD following an authorized surgery in the claim. The employer argued that claimant was off work due to his termination, not his impairment from the allowed conditions in the claim, and relied upon caselaw that applied the doctrine of voluntary abandonment which the Court in AutoZone pointed out is no longer in existence. The Court pointed out that the compensation being requested was only paid after the surgery, and it was not requested or paid after the claimant’s termination. The Court indicated that the language change in ORC 4123.56(F) requires the claimant’s inability to work “to stem immediately from an impairment arising from the injury…”, and it is not appropriate to turn the court’s gaze back to the facts and circumstances surrounding why the claimant left the workforce before his surgery. To do so is to resurrect the concept of voluntary abandonment which has been superseded by the legislature.

The employer urged the Court to consider that the claimant’s lost wages were directly related to his termination and, since he was not working at the time of his request, he was ineligible for TTD. In response, the Court indicated that this is not the correct analysis. The Court held that “the legislature did not intend to disqualify any person not working without regard for whether the reason he or she is not working is attributable to the workplace injury.”

Prior to the issuance of this decision, employers could successfully argue against a period of compensation in a claim when the injured worker’s employment ended for reasons unrelated to the claim and based on the claimant’s own actions. If the claimant was no longer in the workforce and their employment had been terminated for violation of a company policy, compensation was not payable, even if the injured worker subsequently obtained approval for surgery in the claim. However, the decision in AutoZone makes it clear that the analysis for entitlement to temporary total compensation is based on the specific facts and circumstances immediately surrounding the request for compensation and there is no “look back” at other reasons why the injured worker was not working. ORC 4123.56(f) states:

If an employee is unable to work or suffers a wage loss as the direct result of an impairment arising from an injury or occupational disease, the employee is entitled to receive compensation under this section, provided the employee is otherwise qualified. If an employee is not working or has suffered a wage loss as a direct result of reasons unrelated to the allowed injury or occupational disease, the employee is not eligible to receive compensation under this section.

Accordingly, AutoZone requires that only the facts and circumstances immediately surrounding the request for compensation are relevant, and prior terminations for reasons unrelated to the claim are considered irrelevant. In the AutoZone case, the results may have been different if the claimant requested compensation immediately following his termination for the altercation with the co-worker and if there was not an approved surgery in the claim. Under those facts, the claimant would have been off work due to reasons unrelated to the claim and based on his own behavior. However, the Court makes it clear that the authorized surgery resulted in lost earnings from the date of the surgery forward, regardless of other prior reasons that the claimant had been out of the workforce.

Clearly, this decision limits an Ohio employer’s ability to argue against the payment of compensation in certain circumstances. It is unclear to what extent this decision applies to termination cases where the facts are distinguishable from the facts in the AutoZone case or in the case of voluntary retirement. The matter has been appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio which will provide the Court with the opportunity to further clarify RC 4123.56(F).

If you have any further questions, please reach out to one of the Perez Morris workers’ compensation practitioners in Columbus or Cleveland.


 

Rick Hernandez, Perez MorrisRick Hernandez joined Perez Morris in 2017. He is a proactive, strategic and dedicated workers’ compensation defense attorney with more than 30 years’ experience. Rick has represented self-insured and state-funded private employers, state agencies, and public and private universities in proceedings before the Industrial Commission of Ohio and at all levels of court within the state of Ohio. You can reach him at [email protected] or (614) 540-2230. Read more

Email Rick Hernandez

 

 

Beth Weeden, Perez MorrisBeth Weeden joined Perez Morris in 2018. With more than 30 years’ experience, she counsels employers in all aspects of their workers’ compensation and risk management programs. She represents both self-insured and state-funded employers including national and regional retail distribution centers, retail stores, staffing services, restaurants, manufacturing facilities and home health care providers. You can reach Beth at [email protected] or (614) 396-3822. Read more

Email Beth Weeden

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Quotes Beth Weeden

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Quotes Beth Weeden

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Quotes Beth Weeden

Perez Morris attorney Beth Weeden discusses how employees may, knowingly or unknowingly, commit workers’ compensation fraud. Beth delves into the investigations process for fraudulent claims, as well as how to respond to and report any known cases.

“Even claims that start out as valid claims can turn fraudulent at some time,” Weeden said. “Listen to and follow up on anonymous tips regarding potential fraud. Follow your gut when it comes to reading through medical records and reviewing physical restrictions for an individual who appears to be doing more according to their Facebook page than what their doctor recommends.”

Read more here: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/workers-compensation-fraud-comes-in-many-forms.aspx

Perez Morris Best Lawyers in America

Perez Morris lawyers recognized in the 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©

Perez Morris Best Lawyers in America picture of attorneysKevin Murch, Beth Weeden, and Mony B.P. Yin have been recognized in the 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©. Michael Aceto and Anne Marie Schloemer were also included in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch!

Best Lawyers is a sophisticated peer-review process that identifies outstanding lawyers by conducting exhaustive surveys in which tens of thousands of leading lawyers confidentially evaluate their professional peers.

Our lawyers were featured in the practice areas listed below:

 

Kevin Murch

  • Commercial Litigation

 

Beth Weeden

  • Workers’ Compensation Law – Claimants
  • Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers

 

Mony B.P. Yin

  • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants

 

Michael Aceto

  • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants

 

Anne Marie Schloemer

  • Litigation – Labor and Employment
Pile of masks with paperwork

How employers can defend themselves against a COVID-19 Claim

Smart Business logoBeth Weeden, Perez Morris headshot

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many employers were challenged to defend themselves against workers’ compensation claims filed by employers who alleged they contracted the virus in the course of their employment. Shutdowns and the widespread nature of the virus changed how employers needed to think about these claims. Lead Attorney Elizabeth Weeden shared information businesses should consider when defending against a claim. Read her full article featured in Smart Business.

 

Beth Weeden Byline in Smart Business