CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a worker's compensation applicant who sought reconsideration of an administrative law judge's (WCJ) findings. The WCJ had determined the applicant sustained injury to specific body parts but found no permanent disability or need for further medical treatment, and also denied a separate injury claim. The applicant argued that the agreed medical examiner's (AME) reports lacked substantial evidence, that the findings on impairment and treatment were unsupported, and that certain exhibits were improperly excluded. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's reliance on the AME's opinions as substantial evidence and finding no error in excluding the late-submitted exhibits.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a worker's compensation applicant who sought reconsideration of an administrative law judge's (WCJ) findings. The WCJ had determined the applicant sustained injury to specific body parts but found no permanent disability or need for further medical treatment, and also denied a separate injury claim. The applicant argued that the agreed medical examiner's (AME) reports lacked substantial evidence, that the findings on impairment and treatment were unsupported, and that certain exhibits were improperly excluded. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's reliance on the AME's opinions as substantial evidence and finding no error in excluding the late-submitted exhibits.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.