J. Paul Getty Trust; Esis Central Wc Claims, Karla Neal, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAKARLA NEAL,Applicant,vs.J. PAUL GETTY TRUST; ESIS CENTRAL WCCLAIMS,Defendants.Case No. ADJ1082547 (LBO 0311990)ADJ3651061(LBO0321320)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the report of workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in the WCJ’s report which we adopt and incorporate, we will deny reconsideration. We have given the WCJ’s credibility determination great weight because the WCJ had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witness. (Garza v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312, 318-319 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500, 504-505].) Furthermore, we conclude there is no evidence of considerable substantiality that would warrant rejecting the WCJ’s credibility determination. (Id.)///////////////////// , For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration is DENIED. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD ________________________________CHAIR KATHERINE ZALEWSKII CONCUR,____________________________________________ DEIDRA E. LOWE____________________________________________ JOSÉ H. RAZODATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIANOV 17 2017SERVICE MADE ON THE ABOVE DATE ON THE PERSONS LISTED BELOW AT THEIR ADDRESSES SHOWN ON THE CURRENT OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD.KARLA NEAL, IN PRO PERGRIFFIN LOTZ & HOLZMANabs , STATE OF CALIFORNIADivision of Workers’ CompensationWorkers’ Compensation Appeals BoardCase No.. ADJ1082547 ADJ3651061KARLA NEAL J. PAUL GETTY TRUST; ESIS VS. CENTRAL WC CLAIMSWorkers’ Compensation Judge:Janet M. CoulterDate: 10/6/2017REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONONPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONIINTRODUCTION
Karla Neal, vs. J. Paul Getty Trust; Esis Central Wc Claims,
This case is about Karla Neal, who was employed as a visitor service assistant for the J. Paul Getty Trust. She sustained two injuries to her bilateral wrists, neck and right shoulder. At trial, it was found that she had 20% disability in each of the two cases and that she had not sustained the burden of proof necessary to prove an industrial injury to her psyche. After the trial, Neal filed a Petition for Reconsideration, claiming that the court relied on stale medical reports that do not reflect her current disability and that her industrial injuries have worsened and that she has had further injuries as a result of the industrial injuries. The Petition for Reconsideration was denied, as the worsening of her condition was not raised at the Mandatory
- Filed On:
- Court: California, Long Beach
- Case No. ADJ1082547
To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days
Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!
Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.