What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration granted; Findings and Award of May 15, 2023 amended to increase permanent disability from 38% to 44% due to insufficient apportionment evidence.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings and Award of May 15, 2023, regarding permanent disability and apportionment.
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.
ApportionmentApplicant prevailedcervical spine · thoracic spine · lumbar spine
Dr. Assil's apportionment opinion was conclusory and lacked sufficient explanation, thus not substantial medical evidence; defendant did not meet burden of proof for apportionment, entitling applicant to a non-apportioned permanent disability award of 44%.
From the decision · page 3medical evidence. The reports do not describe in detail how non-industrial factors are contributing to applicant's permanent impairment. While we understand that non-industrial obesity may be contributing to applicant's condition, Dr. Assil does not sufficiently explain how obesity is contributing to the permanent impairment. Additionally, even assuming age in and of itself could be a basis for apportionment, there is insufficient explanation regarding how applicant's age (rather than activities or conditions during applicant's lifetime) have contributed to degeneration and how this degeneration has contributed to applicant's permanent impairment.