On June 26, 2018, in
Hill v. American Medical Response, the Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a workers compensation statute mandating the use of the “current edition” of the
American Medical Association (AMA) Guides to assess impairment. The court concluded that the provision was not an improper delegation of legislative authority, finding that the “current edition” of the
AMA Guides refers to the edition in place when the statute was enacted (6th Edition), and not the most current edition adopted by the
AMA at the time of a claimant’s injury or examination. The court also ruled that mandatory use of the
AMA Guides does not deny due process or access to justice, and does not violate the workers compensation grand bargain.
NCCI will monitor for further developments and any potential impact on the workers compensation system.
Other recent developments on Challenges to Third-Party Guides can be found in NCCI’s Court Case Update—Countrywide—June 2018.
This article is provided solely as a reference tool to be used for informational purposes only. The information in this article shall not be construed or interpreted as providing legal or any other advice. Use of this article for any purpose other than as set forth herein is strictly prohibited.