CompFox AI Summary
Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer:
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a finding that the applicant did not sustain a compensable psychiatric injury. The applicant argued the finding was not based on substantial medical evidence, specifically challenging the opinions of a Qualified Medical Examiner (QME). The Board adopted the judge's report, which found that while work stress may have exacerbated the applicant's pre-existing conditions, the predominant cause of her psychiatric diagnoses was non-industrial, as required by Labor Code section 3208.3. Therefore, the applicant failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that actual employment events were the predominant cause of her psychiatric injury.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Here's a summary of the case in four sentences for a lawyer:
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a finding that the applicant did not sustain a compensable psychiatric injury. The applicant argued the finding was not based on substantial medical evidence, specifically challenging the opinions of a Qualified Medical Examiner (QME). The Board adopted the judge's report, which found that while work stress may have exacerbated the applicant's pre-existing conditions, the predominant cause of her psychiatric diagnoses was non-industrial, as required by Labor Code section 3208.3. Therefore, the applicant failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that actual employment events were the predominant cause of her psychiatric injury.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.