What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration denied.
Petition for Reconsideration filed by Defendants and denied by the WCAB panel after review of the WCJ report.
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.
Permanent disability ratingApplicant prevailedcervical spine · neck
The AME report and MRI evidence established new and further disability to the cervical spine, which was not included in the original award but supported reopening under Labor Code 5803.
From the decision · page 5I found that the PQME and, ultimately the AME reports, were substantial medical evidence on the issue of new and further disability and the timely filed Petition to Reopen and subsequent medical opinion established the new and further disability to include the cervical spine disability. It is further established that pursuant to Labor Code § 5803 the Appeals Board has jurisdiction over its Orders, Decisions and Awards. It is noted that prior to the initial settlement that no cervical MRIs were performed. It was only after the filing of the Petition to Reopen that the PQME/AME ordered the diagnostic study to clarify Applicant's situation (See Exhibit 2 Applicant). Upon review of the MRI study, the AME concluded that, indeed, there was new and further disability involving the cervical spine, based upon this new medical evidence that was not available beforehand for whatever reason. This is consistent with the findings in Alliano v.