Employee returned to work after medical procedure, had difficulty performing his job, resigned
A physician’s opinion on an employee’s whole person impairment (WPI) should constitute substantial evidence upon which the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board of California can rely and should explain the reasoning behind the assessment, a recent ruling said.
In September 2015, the applicant in the case of Schmidt vs. Fremont Swim School, Security National Insurance Company, administered by AmTrust N.A. sustained an industrial injury while working for the defendant, the Fremont Swim School. He had industrially-related hernia surgery in October 2015. He returned to work, experienced difficulty performing his job, and voluntarily resigned in June 2018.
Dr. Davidson, the qualified medical evaluator, issued a December 2019 report explaining that a strict application of the American Medical Association (AMA) Guides resulted in the applicant having a 0% WPI because he no longer had a palpable defect or hernia due to surgical treatment.
However, Dr. Davidson said that a strict application of the AMA Guides was not an accurate depiction of the applicant’s permanent impairment since he did have surgical scarring and persistent pain. The doctor identified 10% WPI.
Dr. Davidson did not give a physician’s return-to-work form. The swim school did not provide an offer of alternative or modified work. The parties settled the case via compromise and release in September 2020. But they disputed...
One repeated detail in the stories stood out: fictional encounters often featured people addressing Trump as “sir” and asking for help. In 2016, a Washington correspondent for the Toronto Star beg...