Jacob Vervalin vs. Mission Uniform & Linen; Travelers Insurance

This case involves a dispute between Jacob Vervalin, an employee, and Mission Uniform & Linen and Travelers Insurance, the defendant. Vervalin claimed to have sustained industrial injury to his lumbar, thoracic, and cervical spine on April 20, 2007. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration of the September 14, 2009 Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge. After review of the record, the Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and decision by the WCJ. The Board found that the proper procedures and timelines governing objections to a treating physician's recommendation for spinal surgery were not

Mission Uniform & Linen; Travelers Insurance Jacob Vervalin WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJACOB VERVALIN, Applicant,vs.MISSION UNIFORM & LINEN; TRAVELERS INSURANCE, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ288083 (RDG 0128539)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            On November 23, 2009, we granted reconsideration of defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration of the September 14, 2009 Findings and Award issued by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therein, the WCJ found, based on the parties’ prior stipulations, that applicant, while employed as a sales representative on April 20, 2007, sustained industrial injury to his lumbar and thoracic spine and claimed to have sustained industrial injury to his cervical spine. The WCJ further found that the July 16, 2009 agreed medical examination (AME) report of Donald Swartz, M.D., was admissible as Appeals Board Exhibit Y and that applicant was entitled to spinal surgery on an industrial basis. We granted reconsideration in order to further study the facts and issues presented. We now issue our Decision After Reconsideration.            In its Petition for Reconsideration, defendant contended that the WCJ erred in admitting the Dr. Swartz’ July 16, 2009 supplemental AME report into evidence. Defendant further contended that the WCJ erred in finding that applicant is entitled to spinal surgery on an industrial basis. ,             Applicant filed an Answer, and the WCJ issued a Report and Recommendation of Workers’ Compensation Administrative Law Judge on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we affirm his decision.            Based on our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below, we will rescind the WCJ’s decision and return this matter to the trial level for further proceedings and decision by the WCJ.RELEVANT FACTS            The relevant facts are not in dispute. Applicant underwent an AME by Dr. Swartz on April 16, 2008. Dr. Swartz referred a

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.