CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior award. The Board found that the defendant failed to provide substantial evidence for apportionment of applicant's disability, as the QME's opinion lacked sufficient explanation of how non-industrial factors caused the disability. Additionally, the Board determined that the Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A) reduction in indemnity was inapplicable because the applicant had already returned to work in her regular position. Commissioner Lowe dissented, arguing that the QME's apportionment of 10% disability to non-industrial factors constituted substantial evidence.
MADELINE CASACCA vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and REHABILITATION, CTF SOLEDAD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND is a workers' compensation case decided in Salinas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Salinas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior award. The Board found that the defendant failed to provide substantial evidence for apportionment of applicant's disability, as the QME's opinion lacked sufficient explanation of how non-industrial factors caused the disability. Additionally, the Board determined that the Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A) reduction in indemnity was inapplicable because the applicant had already returned to work in her regular position. Commissioner Lowe dissented, arguing that the QME's apportionment of 10% disability to non-industrial factors constituted substantial evidence.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.