Maria Salas vs. Med 3000 Group, Inc.; American Home Assurance Company, Administered By, Chartis Claims, Inc.

This case is about Maria Salas, who was injured while working for Med 3000 Group, Inc. and American Home Assurance Company, administered by Chartis Claims, Inc. Salas sought workers' compensation for her injuries, which included her left elbow, left arm, right knee, left knee, and nose. The parties did not agree on the level of permanent disability caused by the injury or on the issue of apportionment. The case was tried on April 13, 2010, and the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the June 2, 2010 Findings and Award. The case was returned to the trial level for development of the record by obtaining supplemental reporting from the Agreed Medical Examiner concerning his evaluation of the applicant's

Med 3000 Group, Inc.; American Home Assurance Company, Administered By, Chartis Claims, Inc. Maria Salas WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARIA SALAS, Applicant,vs.MED 3000 GROUP, INC.; AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, administered by, CHARTIS CLAIMS, INC., Defendant.Case No. ADJ2610020OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendant seeks reconsideration of the June 2, 2010 Findings and Award of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) who found that applicant incurred industrial injury to her left elbow, left arm. right knee, left knee and nose while employed by defendant as a receptionist on August 29. 2007. causing a need for future medical treatment and 38% permanent disability after apportionment.            Defendant contends that the Finding of 38% permanent disability is not supported by substantial evidence because the parties’ Agreed Medical Examiner (AME), Charles Herring, M.D., did not properly apply the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition (AMA Guides) in evaluating applicant’s condition.            An answer was not received.            We grant reconsideration and as our decision after reconsideration rescind the June 2, 2010 Findings and Award. Dr. Herring did not evaluate applicant’s condition as prescribed by the AMA Guides and his reporting is not substantial evidence in support of the WCJ’s determination of permanent disability. The case is returned to the trial level for development of the record by obtaining supplemental reporting from Dr. Herring concerning his evaluation of applicant’s , permanent disability using the AMA Guides, and for a new decision by the WCJ.            Applicant admittedly incurred specific industrial injury while working for defendant when she tripped and fell on August 29. 2007. Medical treatment was provided. However, the parties did not agreed on the level of permanent disability caused by the inj

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.