CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns a workers' compensation applicant seeking reconsideration of a decision denying his claim for a psychiatric injury. While the Board would have admitted the applicant's medical reports, they found these reports lacked substantial evidence. Specifically, the reports were deemed unreliable as it was unclear if the conclusions were based on Dr. Curtis's own examination or a collaborative effort, failing to meet the burden of proof for industrial causation. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns a workers' compensation applicant seeking reconsideration of a decision denying his claim for a psychiatric injury. While the Board would have admitted the applicant's medical reports, they found these reports lacked substantial evidence. Specifically, the reports were deemed unreliable as it was unclear if the conclusions were based on Dr. Curtis's own examination or a collaborative effort, failing to meet the burden of proof for industrial causation. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was denied.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.