CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ properly relied on the agreed medical evaluator's (AME) opinion, which provided substantial evidence for the impairment rating. The AME's analysis, which accounted for severe degenerative changes and gait abnormalities beyond a strict AMA guide application, was deemed persuasive and within legal parameters. The Board affirmed that the AME's reasoning for adding impairments due to a synergistic effect, rather than combining them, was supported by case law and the medical evidence.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ properly relied on the agreed medical evaluator's (AME) opinion, which provided substantial evidence for the impairment rating. The AME's analysis, which accounted for severe degenerative changes and gait abnormalities beyond a strict AMA guide application, was deemed persuasive and within legal parameters. The Board affirmed that the AME's reasoning for adding impairments due to a synergistic effect, rather than combining them, was supported by case law and the medical evidence.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.