Legal Opinion
Hinton v. Labor Source
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided December 16, 1997No. 89894PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HANSEN, Presiding Judge:
¶ 1 The facts in this action are undisputed. This review arises from an order issued after a hearing in April of 1997 on the issue of Claimant’s temporary total disability only. The only matter in dispute is whether an employer has the obligation to offer light duty to a claimant if it is available, or whether the burden is on a claimant to inform his employer he is available for light duty. Under the facts of this case, we hold an employer must inform an employee of the availability of light duty work in order to defend against responsibility for paying…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lukens, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- FMC Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Georgia Pacific Corp. v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
- Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
3Cited by15 opinions
- BE & K. CONST. v. AbbottSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
- Akers v. Seaboard FarmsCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1998
- Cherokee Industries, Inc. v. AlvarezCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2003
- Tubbs v. Oklahoma Tax CommissionCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2001
- Smith v. Millwood SchoolsCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.