RPNA Continues Fight Against Underground Regulations on Behalf of QMEs

For two years, RPNA’s Nick Roxborough has been leading the fight against the Division of Workers’ Compensation’s (DWC) underground rule-making, which is impacting hundreds of QMEs in California. He recently filed an amended complaint with the Los Angeles County Superior Court, adding a new allegation that the DWC used underground rules relating to time spent on medical research as a basis to deny reappointment…

Judge Finds QME Denials Based on Possible Underground Rules

In RPNA’s case (Howard v DIR), LA County Superior Court Judge James Chelfant opined that the Division of Workers’ Compensation relied on unenforceable underground regulations when it denied applications for reappointment from two QMEs and unreasonably delayed hearings when the doctors objected. According to Nick Roxborough, the judge’s decision means the division “can’t continue to…

Zurich and Applied Underwriters…Now Travelers

RPNA continues to fight against unlawful WC side agreements. Nick Roxborough recently finished hearings before a DOI administrative law judge in the case Davidson Hotel v. Travelers. Once again, another carrier is attempting to illegally enforce the terms of its unfiled workers’ compensation side agreements, subjecting employers to out-of-state arbitrations, over collateralization, and overpayment for coverage due to poor claims handling. RPNA…

RPNA’s Fight Against Applied Underwriters Leads As Workers’ Comp Executive’s Top Story

    A leading insurance trade journal, Workers’ Comp Executive, has named RPNA’s Nick Roxborough and his work involving employer battles against insurance carriers—in this instance, Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary Applied Underwriters—as the No. 1 story in 2017. Roxborough was identified as one of two attorneys “leading the fight in cases against Applied.” RPNA is proud…

WorkCompCentral Highlights The Question of Jurisdiction and Underground Regulations in RPNA’s QME Suit Against DIR

RPNA’s suit against the Department of Industrial Relations (Howard v DIR) was yesterday’s WorkCompCentral’s top story, and is being followed by the entire California QME community, as well as various governmental entities. Central to this continuing story is the issue of jurisdiction over the case, which is being challenged by Nicholas Roxborough on behalf of a group of former qualified medical evaluators (QMEs) who allege they lost their jobs after the state wrongfully started imposing a new interpretation of billing rules.

CDI Issues Ruling to Fast Track Cases Against Berkshire Hathaway Subsidiary Applied Underwriters

The California Department of Insurance (CDI) just issued a ruling that is expected to speed up the resolution of many cases currently against Applied Underwriters. These cases address the same issues that the CDI had ruled on more than a year ago, which left in place the precedential decision in the Shasta Linen case and ended the dispute over the legality of Applied Underwriter’s EquityComp program and its associated unfiled side agreements (RPAs).

LA Superior Court Grants Trial in QME Dispute Against Division of Workers’ Compensation

Two qualified medical evaluators (QMEs) who where challenging the Division of Workers’ Compensation’s decision not to renew their certifications were recently granted a trial on February 6, 2018. At that time, the Los Angeles Superior Court is expected to rule on whether or not the Division is using “underground regulations” to justify denying recertification to hundreds of QMEs.

Work and Friendship

RPNA’s camaraderie and winning culture was the focus of a feature article recently profiled in the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journals, California’s largest legal news provider. The article talks about the early stages of RPNA, which was built upon the foundation of friendship and earned a reputation for handling complex issues employers face with their insurance providers.

RPNA’s Nicholas Roxborough Fights For Due Process of Law in Case Against the Department of Industrial Relations

The Department of Industrial Relations’ (DIR) new criteria for determining who can serve as a QME without going through due process is the center of a new controversy and complaint against the DIR and its director, Christine Baker. Employers rights attorney Nicholas Roxborough filed the suit in the Los Angeles County Superior Court on behalf…

RPNA Carves A Meaningful Path for Policyholders

The issue of Applied Underwriters’ ‘bait and switch’ marketing tactics to sell its workers’ compensation product was the focus of a recent San Fernando Valley Business Journal Article. The article highlighted RPNA’s case against the Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary (Luxor Cabs v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company) as well as a similar case (Shasta Linen Supply, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters, Inc.), which prompted the California Department of Insurance (CDI) to hold Applied Underwriters accountable for its unlawful practices and comply with well recognized state filing requirements.

Referencing CDI’s settlement with Applied Underwriters, Nick Roxborough stated, “The settlement is a good first start for policyholders of Applied Underwriters in that it renders the Shasta Linen decision precedential for all policyholders similarly situated to the Shasta Linen plaintiffs.”