Caryl Erickson vs. Southern California Permanente Medical Group/kaiser Permanente, Permissibly Self-insured

Southern California Permanente Medical Group/Kaiser Permanente, Permissibly Self-Insured Caryl Erickson WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACARYL ERICKSON, Applicant,vs.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP/KAISERPERMANENTE, Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendant(s).Case Nos. POM 0246580POM 0246582OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendant, Southern California Permanente Medical Group/Kaiser Permanente, seeks reconsideration of the Amended Findings and Award issued by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on November 16, 2006.1 In that decision, the WCJ found that applicant’s two admitted industrial injuries to her neck and in the form of fibromyalgia, which she sustained while employed by defendant from 1994 through January 13, 2000 (Case No. POM 0246580) and on October 26, 1999 (Case No. POM 0246582), caused overall permanent disability of 72%. Applying Labor Code section 4664,2 however, the WCJ also determined that applicant’s permanent disability indemnity award must be “reduced by $14,171.00,” which was the amount of the permanent disability indemnity payable under applicant’s October 1, 1997 stipulated 25% permanent disability award for two earlier admitted low back injuries, which she sustained while employed by defendant from June 27, 1977 through May 14, 1994 (Case No. POM 0223242) and on May 19, 1994 (Case No. POM 0223243). Therefore, after apportionment under section 4664, 1            Defendant’s petition for reconsideration captions Case Nos. POM 0223242, POM 0223243, POM 0246580, and POM 0246582. Although the former two cases have bearing on the latter two, the former cases were not directly affected by the Amended Findings and Award at issue; therefore, defendant’s petition will be deemed to have been filed only in the latter two cases.2            All further statutory references are to the Labor Code. , the WCJ found that applicant is entitl

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.