MARTIN GARCIA vs. MCKITTRICK RANCH; ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a worker's compensation claim by Martin Garcia against McKittrick Ranch and Zenith Insurance Company. The worker's compensation administrative law judge found that Garcia sustained an admitted industrial injury to his left shoulder while employed as a laborer on August 13, 2010. The judge also found that Garcia became permanent and stationary on September 16, 2010 and that the injury caused temporary disability for which Garcia had been adequately compensated and caused 2% permanent disability after apportionment. Garcia sought reconsideration of the judge's decision, arguing that the judge erred in relying on the opinion of the panel qualified medical examiner. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amended the judge's decision to defer the issue of permanent disability, otherwise affirmed the July 5,

MCKITTRICK RANCH; ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY MARTIN GARCIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARTIN GARCIA, Applicant,vs.MCKITTRICK RANCH; ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7523216(Bakersfield District Office)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION ANDDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of the July 5, 2012 Findings of Fact and Award issued by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therein, the WCJ found that applicant sustained admitted industrial injury to his left shoulder while employed as a laborer on August 13, 2010. The WCJ further found that applicant became permanent and stationary on September 16, 2010 and that the injury herein caused temporary disability for which applicant had been adequately compensated and caused 2% permanent disability after apportionment.            Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in relying on the opinion of panel qualified medical examiner (QME) Kenneth Baldwin, M.D., in finding 2% permanent disability arguing that Dr. Baldwin’s opinion is not substantial evidence, that the WCJ did not explain his reasoning for relying on Dr. Baldwin’s opinion, and that Dr. Baldwin failed to spend the minimum face-to-face time evaluating him.            Defendant filed an Answer. The WCJ issued a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration.            Based on our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below, we will grant reconsideration, amend the WCJ’s decision to defer the issue of permanent disability, otherwise affirm the July 5, 2012 Findings of Fact, rescind the Award, and return this matter to the trial level. As to the substantiality of Dr. Baldwin’s opinion, we agree with the WCJ that it is substantial for the reasons stated in his Report, which we adopt and incorporate herein, except for his recommendation that we deny reconsideration. ,             Neverthele

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.