SIMILARCASE

Loading

ADJ10848254 — California WCAB decision · SimilarCase

Sign in Sign up Try a case →

California WCABPanel decision

ADJ10848254 · September 7, 2021

The Appeals Board panel denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration and upheld the WCJ's Findings and Award that the applicant sustained a psychiatric injury arising out of and in the course of employment.

Issues decided: 1
Medical opinions weighed: 1
Authorities named: 1
District office: Oakland

What the panel ordered

The Appeals Board panel denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration and upheld the WCJ's Findings and Award that the applicant sustained a psychiatric injury arising out of and in the course of employment.

Defendant filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the WCJ on April 14, 2021, which was denied by the Appeals Board panel on September 7, 2021.

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.

Psyche AOE/COEApplicant prevailedpsyche

The Appeals Board found substantial evidence in the QME Dr. Fruge's well-reasoned reports and deposition testimony that the applicant's pre-existing psychiatric disorders were predominantly aggravated by his employment with defendant, constituting a compensable industrial injury under Labor Code section 3208.3.

From the decision · page 1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award, issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on April 14, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained a psychiatric injury, arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE), while employed by defendant.

Private workspace

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

Paste the dispute. The extractor builds the factors, the search finds the decisions the same facts won, and the matter stays saved. Free account.

Start a matter Search without an account →

Applicant had pre-existing psychiatric disorders prior to employment with defendant.

Favours neutral

The dispute was whether the aggravation of the pre-existing condition constituted a compensable injury arising out of employment.

From the decision · page 3Our review of the trial record indicates there is no dispute that applicant had psychiatric disorders prior to his employment by defendant. The dispute is whether the aggravation of that pre-existing condition constitutes an injury AOE/COE.

QME Dr. Fruge opined that the applicant's pre-existing psychiatric disorders were predominantly aggravated by his employment with defendant, causing increased disability.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This opinion constituted substantial evidence supporting compensability of the psychiatric injury.

From the decision · page 2After careful consideration of industrial and non-industrial stressors, it is this examiner's opinion, with reasonable medical probability, that the applicant' pre- existing Hypochondriasis Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Nicotine Dependence, and feelings of nervousness were predominately (i.e., greater than 50%) aggravated by his cumulative, industrial exposure from 2010 to May of 2016, which increased his level of disability. The applicant's pre-existing feelings of nervousness rose to the level of Generalized Anxiety Disorder With Panic Attack. the applicant' psychiatric disorders undoubtedly brought about disability, as they significantly hinder his capacity to function in personal and occupational spheres of his life, and require immediate medical intervention in order to be effectively managed. It was specific behaviors demonstrated by management of Google that led to the applicant' psychiatric disability: (1) insufficient personnel support for work projects and on-call duties; (2) failure to communicate changes to project deadlines; (3) wrongful reprimands; and (4) unprofessional response to subordinate disclosure of suicidal ideation. (App. Exh. 1, p. 49.)