Afra Cornejo vs. County Of Los Angeles, Permissibly Self-Insured

.OPN In this case, Afra Cornejo, an applicant, and the County of Los Angeles, a defendant, both sought reconsideration of the Findings of Fact of October 16, 2007, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found, in essence, that, based on the opinion of Laura Wertheimer-Hatch, M.D., an orthopedist and the parties’ agreed medical evaluator, there is a basis for apportionment of applicant’s permanent disability to causes other than the admitted industrial injury she sustained. The WCJ also found that defendant is not entitled to a credit or restitution for its purported overpayment of temporary disability indemnity against its liability

County Of Los Angeles, Permissibly Self-Insured Afra Cornejo WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAAFRA CORNEJO, Applicantvs.COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, permissibly self-insured, Defendant.Case No. MON 0322465OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND REMOVAL            Applicant and defendant separately seek reconsideration1 of the Findings of Fact of October 16, 2007, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found, in essence, that, based on the opinion of Laura Wertheimer-Hatch, M.D., an orthopedist and the parties’ agreed medical evaluator, there is a basis for apportionment of applicant’s permanent disability to causes other than the admitted industrial injury she sustained to her right elbow,wrist, and shoulder, mid and low back, and left thumb and shoulder during a period through May 26, 1998, while employed by defendant as a registered nurse. The WCJ also found that defendant is not entitled to a credit or restitution for its purported overpayment of temporary disability indemnity against its liability for permanent disability indemnity.            Applicant contends that the injury caused 73% permanent disability and that the WCJ erred in determining that there is a basis for apportionment of permanent disability, arguing that Dr. Wertheimer-Hatch’s apportionment opinion is not substantial medical evidence and, therefore, that defendant did not sustain its burden of proving apportionment.            Defendant contends that it is entitled to credit for an alleged $85,920.75 overpayment of temporary disability indemnity and that the WC erred in concluding otherwise, arguing that it erroneously paid applicant temporary disability indemnity for more than 240 weeks despite the [h3][size=1][/size]1 [size=1]Applicant alternatively seeks removal from the Findings of Fact of October 16,2007.[/size][/h3] , limitation of Labor Code section 4636(b)2 and that it should not be estopped from receiving the credit becau

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.