CompFox AI Summary
Defendant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding industrial injury to the applicant in the form of uterine cancer and to the right foot. Defendant contended the WCJ erred by relying on Dr. Lonky's opinions, arguing his specialty was not relevant and he did not adequately consider exposure and latency periods. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the medical record needed further development from additional specialists (oncology, gastroenterology, orthopedics) and supplemental reporting or testimony from Dr. Lonky, thus deferring the issues of industrial injury.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Defendant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding industrial injury to the applicant in the form of uterine cancer and to the right foot. Defendant contended the WCJ erred by relying on Dr. Lonky's opinions, arguing his specialty was not relevant and he did not adequately consider exposure and latency periods. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the medical record needed further development from additional specialists (oncology, gastroenterology, orthopedics) and supplemental reporting or testimony from Dr. Lonky, thus deferring the issues of industrial 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.