September 2011

is a case in which Nelson Torres Godinez, an employee of Valet Detail Service and Auto Restoration, filed a petition for workers’ compensation after being fired from his job. The petition alleged that he had sustained an injury to his neck and back on a specific date in May 2009, as well as a cumulative trauma injury from August 2008 to October 2009. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, finding that there was no credible evidence of an industrial injury and that the medical reports did not support the conclusion that any injury had occurred.

is a case between Pamela Smith, the applicant, and Hyatt Regency and New Hampshire Insurance Company, the defendants. The workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered that the matter required further development of the record, as the medical reports of Paul Kaplan, M.D., did not constitute substantial evidence. The WCJ’s order was not a final order, and the petition for reconsideration was dismissed. The petition for removal was also denied, as the WCJ’s order did not constitute a final order and the petition failed to establish that the order would result in significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The case was returned to the trial level for further development of the record, further proceedings, and a decision by the WCJ.

In this case, Harjinder Singh filed a petition for reconsideration and removal with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board of California. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration as it was not a “final” order, and denied the petition for removal as petitioner had not shown that there would be substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted.

In this case, Aaron Branscomb, an employee of the County of Mendocino, filed a workers’ compensation claim after he twisted his left knee while working for the County in 2008. The City of Willits, where Branscomb had previously worked, provided medical treatment for his left knee after the 2008 incident based upon a stipulated award of 10% permanent disability and future medical treatment that was approved by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge and entered in a prior case involving a left knee industrial injury incurred by applicant while working for the City in 2002. The City sought an opinion from the prior Panel Qualified Medical Examiner (PQME) regarding its obligation to provide medical treatment for applicant’s left knee after the 2008 incident.

In this case, Barbara Edwards, an employee of Caltrans, sought reconsideration of a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (WCJ) decision that she was not entitled to 100 percent permanent disability. The WCJ found that she was in need of future medical care for psyche, cognitive impairment, and headaches, and that she was entitled to a permanent disability award of 88 percent. The WCJ’s decision was based on the opinion of a psychiatric agreed medical evaluator (AME) who apportioned 15 percent of her current difficulties to a pre-existing attention deficit disorder and depression, and 85 percent to the dementia and extreme depression she sustained on an industrial basis. The WCJ granted the petition for reconsideration and rescinded the