CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the finding of industrial injury (stroke) by the WCJ, as defendants argued it lacked sufficient explanation. While the WCJ's initial decision was inadequately explained, medical evidence and the applicant's credible perception of work-related stress supported the finding of a stroke. The Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury as a stroke, but deferred all other issues, including the nature and dates of injury, for the WCJ to address with proper explanation. The defendant's reliance on psychiatric injury standards was misplaced, as physical injury from stress has different evidentiary requirements.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the finding of industrial injury (stroke) by the WCJ, as defendants argued it lacked sufficient explanation. While the WCJ's initial decision was inadequately explained, medical evidence and the applicant's credible perception of work-related stress supported the finding of a stroke. The Board affirmed the finding of industrial injury as a stroke, but deferred all other issues, including the nature and dates of injury, for the WCJ to address with proper explanation. The defendant's reliance on psychiatric injury standards was misplaced, as physical injury from stress has different evidentiary requirements.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.