WAI CHIU LI vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured

was a case in which the County of Los Angeles was appealing a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granting reconsideration and amending the Findings of Fact & Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge. The Board found that the applicant, while employed as a deputy sheriff, sustained an industrial injury to his left forearm, causing 36% permanent disability and a need for further medical treatment. The Board denied the County's Petition for Reconsideration, finding that the opinion of the agreed medical examiner constituted substantial evidence and that the examiner's rating of loss of grip strength was consistent with the American Medical Association's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured WAI CHIU LI WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAWAI CHIU LI, Applicant,vs.COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendants.Case No. ADJ6998138(Van Nuys District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION            Defendant seeks reconsideration of our Opinion and Order Granting Reconsideration and Decision After Reconsideration issued on December 2, 2011,1 wherein we granted reconsideration and amended the Findings of Fact & Award issued by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 12, 2011. In the May 12, 2011 decision, the WCJ found that applicant, while employed as a deputy sheriff on September 9, 2009, sustained industrial injury to his left forearm, causing 15% permanent disability and a need for further medical treatment. In our December 2, 2011 decision, we amended the May 12, 2011 decision to reflect that applicant’s injury caused 36% permanent disability, and that applicant’s counsel was entitled to a fee of $5,100.00.            Defendant contends that we erred in finding 36% permanent disability, arguing that our decision is inconsistent with the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (5th Edition) (AMA Guides) and cannot constitute substantial evidence. Defendant argues that the WCJ correctly disregarded the findings of the agreed medical examiner (AME) regarding loss of grip strength. Defendant requests an en banc hearing on its Petition for Reconsideration. Applicant filed an Answer. _______________________________________________1 This matter had to be reassigned to a new Appeals Board panelist since prior panelist, Deputy Commissioner Susan V. Hamilton, is no longer sitting as a Deputy Commissioner. , We have reviewed and considered the current Petition for Reconsideration and the entire record in this case – as well as all of the arguments previously made.2 For the reasons stated in our December 2, 2011

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.