Workers' compensation tribunal rules claimant is entitled to more panels of medical evaluators
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of California recently ruled that an applicant was unable to conduct the medical-legal discovery needed to determine compensability for the alleged workplace injuries without the additional panels in neurology and psychology that she requested.
The applicant in the case of Bautista vs. The Beauty Box; Employers Preferred Insurance Company claimed that she sustained injuries to her back, neck, shoulders, legs, pelvis, head, and sleep and “COVID” while working for The Beauty Box from January to August 2020. The defendant denied that the injuries arose out of and in the course of employment.
The treating physician evaluated the applicant and diagnosed injury to her cervical and lumbar spine.
A qualified medical evaluator in orthopedics diagnosed cervical and lumbar spine injuries but found that the applicant’s eight months of employment did not cause the injuries. The evaluator stated that the applicant would have to consult with a spine “subspecialist” about specific restrictions and impairment before the report could be finalized.
The applicant asked for the issuance of additional panels of qualified medical evaluators in neurology and psychology to evaluate the alleged injuries under Administrative Director Rule 31.7, which addressed the matter of additional panels in other specialties.
The workers’ compensation administrative law judge...
To display this content from YouTube, you must enable advertisement tracking and audience measurement. 2 min One account known for spreading anti-Indian disinformation and fake news shared what it...