Guadalupe Fregoso vs. Integral Design Construction; : State Compensation Insurance Fund

(LBO 0387820)This case involves a worker's compensation claim by Guadalupe Fregoso against his employer, Integral Design Construction, and the State Compensation Insurance Fund. The worker sustained an injury to his neck, low back, spine and related sleep disorder/disturbance in August 2006. The worker's treating physician's report was rated by a disability evaluator, who was unable to rate the report because it did not comply with the AMA Guides. The worker's disability was ultimately rated at 35% permanent disability, after 10% apportionment to non-industrial causes. The employer contested the permanent disability rating, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, finding that the rating was based

Integral Design Construction; : State Compensation Insurance Fund Guadalupe Fregoso WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIAGUADALUPE FREGOSO, Applicant,vs. INTEGRAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION;: STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCEFUND,Defendants.Case No. ADJ1679104 (LBO 0387820)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FORRECONSIDERATION AND ORDER CORRECTINGCLERICAL ERROR            Defendant, Stale Compensation Insurance Fund, on behalf of its insured. Integral DesignConstruction, seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award, issued June 8, 2010, in which a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found applicant. Guadalupe Fregoso, sustained a period of temporary disability and 35% permanent disability, after 10% apportionment to non-industrial causes, as a result of an August 1, 2006 industrial injury to his neck, low back, spine and related sleep disorder/disturbance, while employed as a framer by Integral Design I Construction.            Defendant contests the permanent disability rating in this case, contending the WCJ’s instructions to the disability evaluator to rate the treating physician’s report without reference to the AMA Guides was reversible error.            As wc arc persuaded that the WCJ’s 35% permanent disability rating was based upon the AMA Guides we shall deny defendant’s petition for reconsideration.I            According to the parties’ stipulations, applicant sustained an admitted injury to his neck, low back, spine and sleep disturbance on or about August 2006, while employed as a framer by , Integra) Design Construction.            A consultative rating of applicant’s treating physician. Dr. E.W. Wassefs November 27, 2007 report was requested. The disability evaluator Mallory Aidells said he was unable to rate the report because Dr. Wassef incorrectly used the range of motion (ROM) method to rate applicant’s whole person impairment (WPI). The rater wrote that a supplemental report that complied with the AMA Guides was needed. 

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.