News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

Amelia Mendoza (deceased) vs. Huntington Hospital, Permissibly Self-insured; And Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (adjusting Agent)

Huntington Hospital, Permissibly Self-Insured; and Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (Adjusting Agent) Amelia Mendoza (Deceased) WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAAMELIA MENDOZA (Deceased), Applicant,vs.HUNTINGTON HOSPITAL, Permissibly Self-Insured; and SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. (Adjusting Agent), Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ6820138ADJ6820197OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of the July 19, 2011 Opinion and Order Granting Reconsideration and Decision After Reconsideration, wherein we rescinded the workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (WCJ) April 26, 2011 Findings and Award, and found that applicant sustained an industrial injury to her left arm on April 12, 2009, which did not result in internal injury or in her death; that she did not sustain an industrial injury on April 14, 2009; and that there are no funds from which to award an attorney’s fee.            Applicant contends that our decision should be vacated and that the WCJ’s decision, finding industrial injury resulting in applicant’s death, should be reinstated, arguing that the WCJ’s determinations regarding credibility are entitled to great weight, that there is “uncontested objective medical evidence” that applicant sustained an industrial internal injury, and that the reports of primary treating physician Dr. Arthur Lipper are substantial evidence. Alternatively, applicant contends we should grant reconsideration and direct the parties to develop the record pursuant to McDuffie v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 138 (Appeals Board en banc) and Tyler v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 389 [62 Cal.Comp.Cases 924], or that a doctor should be appointed pursuant to Labor Code section 5701. ,             We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration and defendant’s Answer, and we have reviewed the record in this matter. Pursuant

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Join our community and never miss an update. Stay connected with cutting-edge insights and valuable resources.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *