ADJ12535729 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration denied.

Defendant seeks reconsideration of WCJ Findings, Award and Orders of March 24, 2022, which granted applicant's Petition to Reopen for new and further temporary disability from October 1, 2021 and continuing indefinitely.

Read the official decision →

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.

Temporary disabilityApplicant prevailedleft wrist · right shoulder · tailbone/coccyx

The WCJ and WCAB found substantial medical evidence supporting new and further temporary disability caused by the November 14, 2018 industrial injury, relying on Dr. Chow's treating physician reports and rejecting defendant's contentions.

From the decision · page 1Defendant seeks reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) Findings, Award and Orders of March 24, 2022, wherein applicant's Petition to Reopen was granted and it was found that applicant's November 14, 2018 injury had caused new and further temporary disability "from October 1, 2021 and continuing indefinitely..." In this matter, in a stipulated Award of May 21, 2020 it was found that, while employed as a school office manager on November 14, 2018, applicant sustained industrial injury to her left wrist, right shoulder, and tailbone/coccyx, causing broken periods of temporary disability, permanent disability of 7%, and the need for further medical treatment.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.

AMERelied upon

In February 2020, opined applicant was permanent and stationary for right shoulder, left wrist, and coccyx with permanent impairment for right shoulder and left wrist only.

From the decision · page 5The parties agreed to utilize Dr. Joel Renbaum as the Agreed Medical Examiner (AME). Dr. Renbaum's opinion had previously been relied upon as the basis for settlement at the time of the Award that was issued on May 21, 2020. In his February 6, 2020 report (Exh. R), Dr. Renbaum opined that applicant was permanent and stationary for her right shoulder, left wrist and coccyx, with permanent impairment for her right shoulder and left wrist only. Applicant then filed a timely Petition to Reopen on December 4, 2020.

PTPRelied upon

In May 2021, recommended surgical consultation for right shoulder and provided work restrictions but did not assess permanent and stationary status.

Her report supported the need for further treatment and work restrictions indicating ongoing disability.

From the decision · page 5She was seen for a consultation with Dr. Ethelynda Tolentino on May 25, 2021. (Exh. Q.) Dr. Tolentino found that she was in need of a surgical consultation for her right shoulder, as well as massage therapy, H-Wave therapy. Dr. Tolentino did not provide an independent assessment of permanent and stationary status. Although she referred to Dr. Renbaum's prior permanent and stationary determination, she also provided her with work restrictions of no lifting/carrying more than 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently, and occasional use of the right arm.

PTPRelied upon

In October and November 2021, found applicant temporarily totally disabled due to work restrictions from the 2018 injury; no employer accommodation was offered.

His reports were substantial evidence supporting temporary disability continuing from October 1, 2021.

From the decision · page 5She was seen by Dr. David Chow as her treating physician. In his October 1, 2021 report (Exh. 6), Dr. Chow found applicant's condition from her November 14, 2018 injury to be one of modified duty with work restrictions of no lifting, pushing, pulling or carrying more than 5 pounds, no overhead activity, no repetitive keyboarding, mousing or typing for more than 15 minutes at a time. If the employer could not accommodate these restrictions, she was temporarily totally disabled. Defendant did not offer any evidence that the employer could accommodate these restrictions. Dr. Chow reiterated his work restriction in his reports of October 27, 2021 (Exh. 7) and November 1, 2021. (Exh. 8.)

ADJ12535729 · June 13, 2022

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

The facts that decided it

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page