Barr Everhart, vs. East Contra Costa Fire Protection District; County Of Contra Costa; Athens Administrators,

is a case involving the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District, the County of Contra Costa, and Athens Administrators. The Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration to review the case. The WCJ found that the applicant, while employed as a firefighter, sustained an industrial injury to his internal system in the form of cancer. The WCJ deferred the issue of the actual date of injury of the applicant's claim and removed Michael Bronshvag, M.D. from further reporting on the case due to a lack of expertise in the medical area involved. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the Findings and Award, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

East Contra Costa Fire Protection District; County Of Contra Costa; Athens Administrators, Barr Everhart, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABARR EVERHART,Applicant,vs.EAST CONTRA COSTA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT; COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA; ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS,Defendants.Case No. ADJ9821275(Oakland District Office)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            The Appeals Board previously granted applicant’s Petition for Reconsideration of the January 24, 2017 Amended Findings and A ward to allow time to review this case. This is our Decision After Reconsideration.            Defendants East Contra Costa Fire Protection District (ECCFPD), and Contra Costa County (County) seek reconsideration of the January 24, 2017 Amended Findings and Award wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant, while employed as a firefighter through June 30, 2012 sustained an industrial injury to his internal system in the form of cancer.1 The WCJ deferred the “issue of the actual date of injury of applicant’s claim.” (Finding of Fact No. 5.) The WCJ also removed Michael Bronshvag, M.D. from further reporting on the case “due to a lack of expertise in the medical area involved.” (Finding of Fact No. 6.) The WCJ awarded medical treatment against both defendants and ordered the County to act as a “banker” for the award.            Defendant ECCFPD contends that the WCJ erred in finding that applicant sustained an industrial injury, arguing that there is there is no substantial medical evidence on the issue of latency and thus no substantial evidence that applicant is entitled to the presumption that his cancer was industrial. ECCFPD 1 Previously, the WCJ issued a Findings and Award on December 29, 2016. He vacated the Findings and Award on January 13, 2017. Both defendants petitioned for reconsideration of the December 29, 2016 decision and both defendants have withdrawn their petitions for reconsideration of that decision. , al

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.