CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, rescinding the WCJ's findings. The WCJ had improperly stricken the QME's reports due to an ex parte communication from the applicant inquiring about her pain impairment rating. While ex parte communications with a QME are prohibited, the Board found that the applicant's communication was not insignificant and could not be categorized as such. However, the Board remanded the case to the trial level to determine if the defendant elected to terminate the evaluation within a reasonable time or engaged in conduct inconsistent with that election, as required by recent en banc precedent.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, rescinding the WCJ's findings. The WCJ had improperly stricken the QME's reports due to an ex parte communication from the applicant inquiring about her pain impairment rating. While ex parte communications with a QME are prohibited, the Board found that the applicant's communication was not insignificant and could not be categorized as such. However, the Board remanded the case to the trial level to determine if the defendant elected to terminate the evaluation within a reasonable time or engaged in conduct inconsistent with that election, as required by recent en banc precedent.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.