Felix Teran vs. Los Angeles County Fire Department Case

In this case, Felix Teran, a firefighter, sought reconsideration of two December 18, 2008 Findings and Awards wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that he sustained an industrial injury on February 7, 2003 to his neck, bilateral shoulders, low back, right foot and bilateral knees that caused 33% permanent disability and that he sustained an industrial injury to his spine, bilateral shoulders, bilateral knees, cardiovascular system, hearing, and skin that resulted in 42% permanent disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration and rescinded the December 18, 2008 Findings and Award, returning the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings and a new decision. The Board also noted that defendant should

LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT; CRAWFORD AND COMPANY, FELIX TERAN, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAFELIX TERAN, Applicant,vs.AND DECISION AFTER LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT; CRAWFORD AND COMPANY, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ3911299 (LBO 0346019)ADJ1084180 (LBO 0346024)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of two December 18, 2008 Findings and Awards wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the applicant, while employed as a firefighter, sustained an industrial injury on February 7, 2003 to his neck, bilateral shoulders, low back, right foot and bilateral knees that caused 33% permanent disability; (ADJ3911299) and that the applicant, while employed during the period September 12, 1970 through February 11, 2003, sustained an industrial injury to his spine, bilateral shoulders, bilateral knees, cardiovascular system, hearing, and skin that resulted in 42% permanent disability (ADJ1084180).            Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in finding that the applicant sustained a specific injury rather than a cumulative trauma injury on February 7, 2003. Applicant also contends that the WCJ erred by not including all of the work restrictions reported by the agreed medical evaluator (AME) in applicant’s permanent disability rating. Applicant also contends that the WCJ erred in subtracting a prior permanent disability award in ADJ4103293 from applicant’s current disability without determining whether the disabilities overlap as required by Kopping v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1099 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 1229]. Finally, applicant contends that the WCJ erred in apportioning some of applicant’s disability to non-industrial factors, arguing , factors, arguing that the AME’s reports are not substantial medical evidence on the issue of apportionment.            We have considered the petition for reconsiderati

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.