Mina Mesic, vs. Hilton Hotels Corporation (hilton San Francisco & Towers); Ace American Insurance Company Administered By Specialty Risk Pleasanton,

In this case, Mina Mesic, a housekeeper, claimed to have incurred specific and cumulative trauma industrial injury to her mid and low back while working for Hilton Hotels Corporation. The parties initially selected William Ross, M.D., to act as their Agreed Medical Examiner (AME) to address issues of injury, permanent disability and apportionment. However, Dr. Ross passed away before he could provide a final report, and the parties then selected Mechel Henry, M.D., as the AME. After reviewing the Appeals Board's en banc decision in Benson, Dr. Henry issued a supplemental report wherein she opined that it would be speculative to apportion applicant's permanent disability among the three injuries. The

HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION (HILTON SAN FRANCISCO & TOWERS); ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY administered by SPECIALTY RISK PLEASANTON, MINA MESIC, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMINA MESIC, Applicant,vs.HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION (HILTON SAN FRANCISCO & TOWERS); ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY administered by SPECIALTY RISK PLEASANTON, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ809466 (SFO 0476863)ADJ2555852 (OAK 0329065)ADJ3801383 (OAK 0329066)OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING REMOVAL            Defendant alternatively seeks reconsideration or removal to the Appeals Board following the June 16. 2009 minute order of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) who denied defendant’s Petition to Obtain a New Agreed Medical Evaluator. Applicant claims to have incurred specific and cumulative trauma industrial injury to her mid and low back while working for defendant as a housekeeper on July 15, 2002, during the period preceding October 30, 2003, and July 16, 2004.1            Defendant contends that the parties’ Agreed Medical Examiner (AME), Mechel Henry, M.D., has provided inconsistent opinions regarding the apportionment of applicant’s permanent disability among her three claimed injuries and has not consulted with or referred applicant to another physician to address the issue in accordance with Labor Code section 4663, and for that reason it was error for the WCJ to deny defendant’s Petition to Obtain a New Agreed Medical Evaluator.2            Defendant’s petition for reconsideration is dismissed because it is not taken from a final 1As noted herein, there may be a question as to whether applicant only incurred specific injury on July 16, 2004, or if that is the end date of a second cumulative trauma injury period. No findings have been made concerning that point.2Further statutory references are to the Labor Code. , order. The WCO only addressed defendant’s petition that a new AME be selected and did not finally

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.