Home/Case Law/Ellen Rundle vs. J. Paul Getty Trust, Pacific Employers/ACR P&C/ESIS, Inc.
Regular DecisionReconsideration

Ellen Rundle vs. J. Paul Getty Trust, Pacific Employers/ACR P&C/ESIS, Inc.

Filed: Jun 17, 2010
ADJ1913652

CompFox AI Summary

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences:

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in Ellen Rundle's claim against the J. Paul Getty Trust. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinions constituted substantial evidence. The judge specifically gave great weight to the AME's credibility findings regarding the applicant's inconsistent statements and lack of candor. Consequently, claims for fibromyalgia, psychiatric injury, and bilateral shoulder injury were denied based on the medical evidence and applicant's credibility.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences:

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in Ellen Rundle's claim against the J. Paul Getty Trust. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's report, which found that the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinions constituted substantial evidence. The judge specifically gave great weight to the AME's credibility findings regarding the applicant's inconsistent statements and lack of candor. Consequently, claims for fibromyalgia, psychiatric injury, and bilateral shoulder injury were denied based on the medical evidence and applicant's credibility.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Ellen Rundle vs. J. Paul Getty Trust, Pacific Employers/ACR P&C/ESIS, Inc. (2010) – | CompFox