CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. The defendant argued that the applicant's chiropractor's reports were inadmissible and not the sole basis for an award, and that cervical spine injury lacked substantial medical evidence. The Board found the chiropractor's reports were properly admitted, even if obtained after the statutory visit limit, as the applicant paid for them. Furthermore, evidence from other physicians supported the cervical spine injury finding, meeting the substantial evidence standard. Therefore, the Board upheld the original award.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. The defendant argued that the applicant's chiropractor's reports were inadmissible and not the sole basis for an award, and that cervical spine injury lacked substantial medical evidence. The Board found the chiropractor's reports were properly admitted, even if obtained after the statutory visit limit, as the applicant paid for them. Furthermore, evidence from other physicians supported the cervical spine injury finding, meeting the substantial evidence standard. Therefore, the Board upheld the original award.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.