So long as an employee or statutory dependent pursuant to § 65.2-515 receives payment of compensation under this title, any such person shall have a duty immediately to disclose to the employer, when the employer is self-insured, or insurer in all other cases, any incarceration, return to employment, increase in his earnings, remarriage or change in his status as a full-time student. Any payment to a claimant by an employer or insurer which is later determined by the Commission to have been procured by the employee or statutory dependent under § 65.2-515 by fraud, misrepresentation, or failure to report any incarceration, return to employment, increase in earnings, remarriage or change in his status as a full-time student may be recovered from the claimant or statutory dependent by the employer or insurer either by way of credit against future compensation payments due the claimant or statutory dependent, or by action at law against the claimant or statutory dependent. The Commission shall provide for notification to the statutory dependent of his obligation under this section.
1985, c. 453, § 65.1-100.3; 1991, c. 355; 1992, c. 466; 1996, c. 570.
Notes of Decisions
Bay Concrete Const. Co., Inc. v. Davis, 600 S.E.2d 144 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 81× “[but] declined to find that the claimant violated Code § 65.2-712.... On [r]eview, the employer argues that these [1999] payments .”
Starbucks Coffee Co. & Am. Zurich Ins. Co. v. Kristin Shy, 734 S.E.2d 683 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 23× “In addition, Starbucks alleged that “claimant did not timely report [her enrollment in college] to the commission,” as required by Code § 65.2-712. C. Deputy Commissioner Hearing On June 3, 2011, a deputy commissioner held a hearing on Starbucks’ four consolidated applications…”
B.P. SOLAR & Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Carolyn E. JONES, 641 S.E.2d 124 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 22× “Solar and Ace American Insurance Company (collectively employer) appeal a decision by the Workers’ Compensa *324 tion Commission finding that: (1) claimant’s short and long-term disability payments from an independent source did not constitute an increase in earnings which…”
Uninsured Emp.'s Fund v. Wilson, 619 S.E.2d 476 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 5× “Comp. Lexis 1819 at *3 (Oct. 7, 2002) (noting that the “operative statute” in Mabe was Code § 65.”
Genesis Health Ventures, Inc. v. Pugh, 591 S.E.2d 706 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 7× “Code § 65.2-712. Third, in Lam the employer sought information from Lam that would have permitted it, had Lam cooperated, to timely file an agreement to terminate the award.”
United Airlines, Inc. v. Hayes, 708 S.E.2d 418 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “2-711 (requiring a claimant to report to the commission any change in his residential address); Code § 65.2-712 (requiring a claimant to report, inter alia, a return to employment or increase in earnings); Code § 65.”
NiSource, Inc. v. Thomas, 674 S.E.2d 581 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “On November 8, 2006, following the commission’s rejection on technical grounds of its two previous applications, employer filed an application for a hearing alleging that claimant had returned to work on or before July 11, 2006, and had failed to report earnings as required by…”
Uninsured Emp.'s Fund v. Peters, 601 S.E.2d 687 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “Code § 65.2-712. Third, in Lam the employer sought information from Lam that would have permitted it, had Lam cooperated, to timely file an agreement to terminate the award.”
Lam v. Kawneer Co., Inc., 566 S.E.2d 874 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “The worker did not dispute that he neglected to comply with the notice requirements of Code § 65.2-712. He testified he did not think he needed to provide that information because he was not asking the insurer “to make up the difference.”
McFadden v. Carpet House, 591 S.E.2d 708 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 6× “2-708 provides that where an employer seeks to terminate or modify an outstanding award based on a change in the claimant’s condition, “[n]o such review shall affect such award as regards any moneys paid except pursuant to [§ ] 65.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.