Cottage Hospital;Keenan and Associates Nulwala, Batool WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA BATOOL NULWALA, Applicant,vs. COTTAGE HOSPITAL; KEENAN & ASSOCIATES,Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ7009927OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING RECONSIDERATIONAND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award of May 26, 2010, in which the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found, in relevant part, that applicant, while employed as an x-ray technician on July 22, 2009, sustained industrial injury to her neck and right shoulder, and that applicant is entitled to temporary disability benefits from September 28, 2009 to the present and continuing. The WCJ also awarded self-procured medical treatment and ongoing medical treatment, as well as an attorney’s fee. Defendant contends that applicant is not entitled to temporary disability benefits because her employer, Cottage Hospital, offered modified work immediately after the injury, and that Cottage Hospital remains ready, willing and able to accommodate the restrictions set forth by Dr. Montgomery’. Defendant further contends that the WCJ erred in relying on City of Seaside v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Bd. (Sanchez) (1991) 56 Cal.Comp.Cases 598 [writ denied]. Applicant filed an answer. At the trial hearing of March 25, 2010, the parties stipulated that applicant sustained industrial injury to her right shoulder and neck on July 22, 2009, and that temporary disability was paid from July 29, 2009 to August 11,2009. Applicant’s attorney asserted on the record that “the issue at hand is the applicant is claiming temporary benefits from August 12, 2009 to the , present and continuing based on Dr. Montgomery’s finding of temporary partial disability, and the assertion that no offer of modified work was communicated to her by Cottage Hospital.” The Minutes of Hearing (MOH) of March 25, 2010 record the following additional stipulations of the pa
Menu
