CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant's first petition for reconsideration and denied his second. The applicant sought reconsideration of a finding that his stroke and related injuries were not work-related, arguing a physiatrist's opinion constituted substantial medical evidence. The WCJ and Board found Dr. Schilling lacked the neurological expertise to establish industrial causation, and the consulting neurologist did not confirm it. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof with substantial evidence.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant's first petition for reconsideration and denied his second. The applicant sought reconsideration of a finding that his stroke and related injuries were not work-related, arguing a physiatrist's opinion constituted substantial medical evidence. The WCJ and Board found Dr. Schilling lacked the neurological expertise to establish industrial causation, and the consulting neurologist did not confirm it. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof with 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.