News and Insights

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

HORTENCIA GARCIA vs. WHITE APRON, INC.; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

WHITE APRON, INC.; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA HORTENCIA GARCIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAHORTENCIA GARCIA, Applicant,vs.WHITE APRON, INC.; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7785597(Anaheim District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            Applicant Hortencia Garcia (applicant) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Order (F&O) issued in this case by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on August 20, 2012. In that F&O, the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant did not sustain injury to her left wrist on August 31, 2010. Applicant contends that her injury to her left wrist is a compensable consequence of her industrial injury, that the finding of no injury is not based on substantial evidence, and that her left wrist is presumed compensable under Labor Code section 5402.1            We did not receive an answer from defendant. We received a Report and Recommendation (Report) from the WCJ in response to the petition for reconsideration, which recommends denial of the petition.            We have reviewed the record and considered the allegations of the petition for reconsideration and the contents of the Report. Based on our review of the record, for the reasons stated in the Report which we adopt and incorporate, and for the reasons stated below, we will deny applicant’s petition.            We write to clarify the following:            The presumption of compensability in section 5402, subdivision (b) applies to circumstances where an employer has knowledge of “an injury” and does not timely reject liability for “the injury.” 1 Unless otherwise stated, all .statutory references are to the Labor Code. , Contrary to applicant’s contention, it is not a new claim or a new injury when defendant has already accepted the injury and the claim is subsequently amended to include other body parts. (Clark v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 269 (writ den.).) In other w

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Your email address will not be published.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 *