ADJ10027874 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

March 28, 2023 Findings and Award affirmed except amended to fix the date of injury under Labor Code section 5412 as July 1, 2015.

Petition for Reconsideration filed by defendant challenging the Findings and Award issued March 28, 2023; WCAB granted reconsideration, reviewed the record, and issued Decision After Reconsideration affirming the F&A except amending the date of injury under Labor Code section 5412.

Read the official decision →

What was disputed, and how it came out

Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.

Statute of limitationsApplicant prevailed

The Board found the date of injury under section 5412 to be July 1, 2015, based on the applicant's knowledge and disability concurrence at the time of claim filing, making the claim timely.

From the decision · page 9FINDINGS OF FACT 4. Applicant's date of injury pursuant to Labor Code section 5412 was July 1, 2015.

AOE/COEApplicant prevailedright knee

The QME, Dr. Parviz Galdjie, opined that the applicant's work activities aggravated her right knee condition, constituting an industrial injury AOE/COE, supported by substantial evidence and legal precedent.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Labor Code section 4060

Labor Code section 4060 medical evaluation procedure for compensability disputes

QME selected to determine compensability of injury

From the decision · page 4Defendant contends the finding of injury AOE/COE is not supported in the record, noting that there "are no reports of a primary treating physician or any other treating physician that establish a work-related injury on a cumulative trauma basis." (Petition, at 9:26.) However, we observe that Dr. Galdjie was selected as the QME pursuant to the dispute resolution protocols of section 4060, which applies to disputes over the compensability of an injury, and provides that in represented cases, "a medical evaluation to determine compensability shall be obtained only by the procedure provided in Section 4062.2." (Lab. Code, § 4060.) The QME is thus tasked with determining the compensability of the claim, and the lack of a corresponding report finding injury authored by a treating physician is not a prerequisite to a finding of compensability.

Lumbermen's Mut. Casualty Co. v. Indus. Acci. Comm. (1946) 29 Cal.2d 492

Normal bodily movement doctrine does not require unusual strain for compensability

Compensability established despite normal bodily movements due to aggravation of pre-existing condition by work activities

From the decision · page 6Where an employee suffers a heart attack brought on by strain and over-exertion incident to his employment the injury or death is compensable, even though the idiopathic condition previously existed, and no traumatic injury is necessary. [Citations omitted.] That it is not required that the exertion or strain be necessarily unusual or other than that occurring in the normal course of the employment is evident. In Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (1946) 73 Cal.App.2d 555 [11 Cal.Comp.Cases 66] at page 563, the court making a comprehensive review of the authorities in regard to the aggravation of a previous condition caused by the employment states: "The cases do not, and in the nature of things cannot, stand for the proposition that the exertion must be unusual before it is compensable.... In such a case whether the strain is a "usual" or an "unusual" one is only one of the facts involved. If there was strain, even though the strain was a strain usual to that type of employment, the injury or death is compensable if there is competent substantial evidence to show the causal connection between that strain and the collapse."

Labor Code section 5412

Date of injury in cumulative trauma cases fixed by knowledge and disability concurrence

Date of injury fixed as July 1, 2015 based on claim filing and knowledge

From the decision · page 9FINDINGS OF FACT 4. Applicant's date of injury pursuant to Labor Code section 5412 was July 1, 2015.

ADJ10027874 · June 29, 2023

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

The facts that decided it

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page