What the panel ordered
Findings of Fact issued on October 31, 2013, are affirmed; applicant is entitled to a new panel QME for his two new injury claims; matter returned to trial level.
Defendant sought removal after the WCJ found applicant entitled to a new panel QME for two new injury claims and that Rule 35.5(e) did not apply. The WCAB granted removal, issued a notice of intention, received responses, and now issues its en banc decision affirming the WCJ's findings.
This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold February 27, 2014.
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.
The Labor Code requires that an employee return to the same evaluator only when a new medical issue arises in the same claim of injury, not for subsequent claims of injury. Rule 35.5(e) is inconsistent with the Labor Code and invalid to the extent it requires return to the same evaluator for new injuries involving the same parties and body parts.
From the decision · page 24 Based upon our review of the relevant statutes and case law, we hold that: