What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration granted in part; Amended Findings and Award affirmed except amended to extend temporary total disability period and award attorney fees.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of the Amended Findings and Award issued by the WCJ on December 8, 2020, regarding temporary total disability benefits.
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.
Applicant was temporarily totally disabled due to the September 28, 2017 injury until November 8, 2019, and is entitled to temporary disability indemnity benefits beyond the previously awarded period, up to 104 weeks from October 30, 2017.
From the decision · page 1We have considered the allegations in the Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) and the Answer, and the contents of the Report. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons discussed below, we will grant reconsideration, and we will affirm the F&A except that we will amend the F&A to find that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period beginning October 30, 2017, to and including November 8, 2019, and that applicant has received temporary disability indemnity during the period from October 30, 2017, through May 11, 2019, (Finding of
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant sustained a separate and distinct injury on September 28, 2017, not an exacerbation of a prior injury.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This fact established that the 104 week limit for temporary disability benefits runs concurrently for independent injuries, allowing additional benefits for the 2017 injury.
From the decision · page 4In his initial report, Dr. Woods stated that applicant's September 28, 2017 injury aggravated his neck, left hand/thumb, thoracolumbar spine, and also his left elbow and forearm. (Board Exh. X, pp. 24 § 25.) Also, as noted above, at the trial, the parties stipulated that on September 28, 2017, applicant sustained injury AOE/COE to his left wrist, left hand and thumb, and his left and right shoulders. (MOH/SOE, p. 2.) Thus, there is no factual support for defendant's contention that the injury in this matter (ADJ11276804) was "an exacerbation" of applicant's injury in case number ADJ11276803.
Applicant reached maximum medical improvement for left wrist and thumb on July 31, 2019, and for other conditions including left shoulder on November 8, 2019.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This fact determined the end date for temporary total disability benefits related to the September 28, 2017 injury.
From the decision · page 3the applicant reasonably reached Maximum Medical Improvement with regard to his left wrist/thumb on July 31, 2019, per his treating hand surgeon, Dr. Wongworawat. With regard to the remainder of his conditions, he reasonably reached a plateau on November 8, 2019, as per Amy Jo Reese, M.D. (Board Exh. X3, Dr. Woods, May 27, 2020, p. 20.)
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
Applicant's September 28, 2017 injury aggravated multiple areas including neck, left hand/thumb, thoracolumbar spine, left elbow and forearm, and caused left shoulder adhesive capsulitis following wrist surgery. Applicant had not reached maximum medical improvement until November 8, 2019 for most conditions.
Dr. Woods' reports and evaluations were relied upon to determine the extent and duration of applicant's temporary total disability and causation of injuries.
From the decision · page 2BACKGROUND Applicant claimed injury to his neck, upper and lower back, bilateral shoulders, left wrist, left hand, and left thumb, when he had to stop a large reel of wire from rolling after it had fallen from a stand, while employed by defendant as a park maintenance worker/electrical worker on September 28, 2017. (see Application for Adjudication of Claim, ADJ11276804.) Applicant had previously claimed injury to the same body parts, when he fell from a ladder, while employed by defendant on March 22, 2017. (see Application for Adjudication of Claim, ADJ11276803.) On January 15, 2019, applicant was evaluated by orthopedic agreed medical examiner (AME) Richard I. Woods, M.D. (Board Exh. X, Dr. Woods, January 25, 2019.) Dr. Woods examined applicant, took a history, and reviewed the medical record. The doctor noted that applicant's March 22, 2017 "fall off a ladder" injured multiple areas and that the September 28, 2017 injury "... aggravated his neck, left hand/thumb, thoracolumbar spine, and also his left elbow and forearm." (Board Exh. X, pp. 24 § 25.) Dr. Woods then said that applicant, "developed left shoulder adhesive capsulitis following the left wrist surgery" and that applicant had not reached maximum medical improvement (MMI). (Board Exh. X, p.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)
Labor Code section 4656(c)(2) limits temporary disability payments for a single injury to 104 compensable weeks within five years from the date of injury.
The Board applied this statute to determine the maximum period for temporary disability indemnity benefits for the September 28, 2017 injury.
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Parties stipulated to injury arising out of and in the course of employment to multiple body parts on September 28, 2017.
From the decision · page 225.) The parties proceeded to trial on October 9, 2019. They stipulated that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his, "... neck, upper and lower back, left wrist, left hand and thumb, left [sic] shoulder and right shoulder" on September 28, 2017, and that defendant was "unable to accommodate modified duties." (Minutes of Hearing and Summary of Evidence (MOH/SOE), October 9, 2019, p. 2.) The issues submitted for decision included temporary disability: applicant claimed the period from May 12, 2019, through September 27, 2019; defendant claimed that the injury in this case (ADJ11276804) was "an exacerbation" of the injury in case number ADJ11276803, and since it paid temporary disability indemnity for 104 weeks in case number ADJ11276803, it had met the 104 week maximum, so it did not owe applicant any additional temporary disability indemnity benefits. (MOH/SOE, p. 3.)
Medical reports from Dr. Woods confirmed the September 28, 2017 injury aggravated multiple body parts and caused left shoulder adhesive capsulitis.
From the decision · page 2BACKGROUND Applicant claimed injury to his neck, upper and lower back, bilateral shoulders, left wrist, left hand, and left thumb, when he had to stop a large reel of wire from rolling after it had fallen from a stand, while employed by defendant as a park maintenance worker/electrical worker on September 28, 2017. (see Application for Adjudication of Claim, ADJ11276804.) Applicant had previously claimed injury to the same body parts, when he fell from a ladder, while employed by defendant on March 22, 2017. (see Application for Adjudication of Claim, ADJ11276803.) On January 15, 2019, applicant was evaluated by orthopedic agreed medical examiner (AME) Richard I. Woods, M.D. (Board Exh. X, Dr. Woods, January 25, 2019.) Dr. Woods examined applicant, took a history, and reviewed the medical record. The doctor noted that applicant's March 22, 2017 "fall off a ladder" injured multiple areas and that the September 28, 2017 injury "... aggravated his neck, left hand/thumb, thoracolumbar spine, and also his left elbow and forearm." (Board Exh. X, pp. 24 § 25.) Dr. Woods then said that applicant, "developed left shoulder adhesive capsulitis following the left wrist surgery" and that applicant had not reached maximum medical improvement (MMI). (Board Exh. X, p.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.