Orman v. Williams Sonoma, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that treating physicians have “the advantage and opportunity to provide a more in-depth opinion, if not a more accurate one.”
• declining to defer to the trial court’s finding that the plaintiff’s testimony was not credible because the trial court set forth no reasons for such a finding and the record did not otherwise demonstrate a basis for this finding
• “The phrase ‘in the course of’ refers to time, place, and circumstances, and ‘arising out of’ refers to cause or origin.”
• “It seems reasonable that the physicians having greater contact with the Plaintiff would have the advantage and opportunity to provide a more in-depth opinion, if not a more accurate one.”
• “Except in the most obvious, simple and routine cases, the claimant in a worker’s compensation action must establish by expert medical evidence the causal relationship alluded to above between the claimed injury ... and the employment activity.”
• “Except in the most obvious, simple and routine cases, the claimant in a workers’ compensation action must establish by expert medical evidence the causal relationship alluded to above between the claimed injury (and disability) and the employment activity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).