CompFox AI Summary
This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the defendant failed to meet their burden of proof on apportionment. The Board found the orthopedic agreed medical examiner's opinions on apportionment were not substantial evidence because they lacked detailed reasoning, failed to explain the causal connection between degenerative disc disease and permanent disability, and did not adequately address apportionment to non-industrial causes. Therefore, the defendant's petition for reconsideration was denied.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the defendant failed to meet their burden of proof on apportionment. The Board found the orthopedic agreed medical examiner's opinions on apportionment were not substantial evidence because they lacked detailed reasoning, failed to explain the causal connection between degenerative disc disease and permanent disability, and did not adequately address apportionment to non-industrial causes. Therefore, the defendant's 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.