News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

EMILY GARCIA vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-insured

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, permissibly self-insured EMILY GARCIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAEMILY GARCIA, Applicant,vs.CITY OF LOS ANGELES, permissibly self-insured, Defendant.Case No. ADJ4148815 (MON 0343933)(Marina del Rey District Office)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION ANDDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendant petitions for reconsideration of the August 24, 2012 Findings and Award. In that decision, the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant Emily Garcia, while employed as a maintenance laborer on February 4, 2005, sustained industrial injury to her “right ankle, psyche, internal, gastro, and sleep disturbance,” causing 63% permanent disability, but did not sustain industrial injury to her right knee or in the form of hypertension. The WCJ found that applicant’s claim for psychiatric injury was not barred by Labor Code section 3208.3(d),1 because she was employed by defendant for more than six months. The WCJ awarded permanent disability indemnity, increased by 15% pursuant to section 4658(d)(2), attorneys’ fees, reimbursement for self-procured medical care, and further medical treatment.            Defendant contends that the WCJ’s finding of permanent disability was not supported by substantial medical evidence, arguing in particular that reports from agreed medical evaluators (AMEs) Dr. Cayton and Dr. Richman did not constitute substantial medical evidence. Defendant further contends that applicant’s claim of psychiatric injury was barred by section 3208.3 because I) the parties stipulated that applicant was employed for less than six months and 2) applicant was actually employed for less than six months. 1 All further statutory references are to the Labor Code. ,             We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration, the timely Amended Petition for Reconsideration, and applicant’s Answer. We have reviewed the record in this matter. The WCJ prepared a Report and Recommend

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Join our community and never miss an update. Stay connected with cutting-edge insights and valuable resources.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *