CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding that the medical reports from Dr. Henrichsen were inadmissible as they were not from a treating physician or a panel Qualified Medical Evaluator. The Board further determined that Dr. Govett's apportionment opinion did not constitute substantial evidence due to insufficient consideration of prior injuries and confusion regarding apportionment requirements. The case is remanded for further development of the record regarding permanent disability and apportionment.
SHANNON GOODWIN vs. KRISPY KREME DONUTS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY is a workers' compensation case decided in San Francisco. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in San Francisco.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding that the medical reports from Dr. Henrichsen were inadmissible as they were not from a treating physician or a panel Qualified Medical Evaluator. The Board further determined that Dr. Govett's apportionment opinion did not constitute substantial evidence due to insufficient consideration of prior injuries and confusion regarding apportionment requirements. The case is remanded for further development of the record regarding permanent disability and apportionment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.