Neyffi Noriega vs. C & D Zodiac And Travelers Insurance

, C & D Zodiac and Travelers Insurance sought removal and reconsideration of the Joint Findings and Award of June 28, 2011, in which the workers' compensation judge found that the applicant was in need of psychiatric medical treatment. The Petition for Removal was dismissed, and reconsideration was granted. The decision was rescinded and the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ, which should include findings that the applicant is not entitled to further psychiatric treatment in two of the cases.

C & D Zodiac and Travelers Insurance Neyffi Noriega WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIANEYFFI NORIEGA, Applicant,vs.C & D ZODIAC and TRAVELERS INSURANCE, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ3247515 (GRO 0033799) ADJ3413251 (GRO 0033800)ADJ3766423 (GRO 0033798)OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR REMOVAL, GRANTING RECONSIDERATION, AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendant seeks removal and reconsideration of the Joint Findings and Award of June 28, 2011, in which the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found that applicant is in need of psychiatric medical treatment.            Defendant contends that the medical report of Dr. Stanwyck, applicant’s Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) in the 2003 injury, is inadmissible in the two 2006 injury cases, and that the medical evidence does not justify in WCJ’s finding that applicant requires further psychiatric medical treatment.            Applicant filed an answer.            The WCJ submitted a Report and Recommendation.            The WCJ’s decision involves a final order on a substantive issue, and reconsideration is an adequate remedy. Therefore, we will dismiss defendant’s Petition for Removal. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843, WCAB Rules of Practice and Procedure.)            Turning to the petition for reconsideration, we note that in ADJ3766423, the WCJ’s finding that applicant is in need of psychiatric medical treatment cannot be sustained because there is no finding that applicant suffered an industrial injury to her psyche during the period January 1, 2000 to January 23, 2006. (See Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) statement of July 11, 2011, wherein the issue of psychiatric injury remains disputed.) ,              In ADJ3413251, there is an admitted injury to applicant’s psyche during the period January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2003. Applicant’s own QME, Dr. Stanwyck, states in his May 18, 2011 report that “there is no indication that as a result of that particular injury [of

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.