What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration granted; Findings and Award of April 7, 2025 amended to find permanent and total disability without apportionment; attorney fees deferred; matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings.
Applicant sought reconsideration of the April 7, 2025 Findings and Award which found industrial injury and valid apportionment to nonindustrial factors; the WCJ recommended denial of reconsideration; the WCAB granted reconsideration and amended the Findings to find permanent and total disability without legal basis for apportionment, deferring attorney fees and returning the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
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.
The WCAB found that the apportionment analysis by Drs. Hirsch and Fink was incomplete and lacked explanation on how percentages were assigned, thus not substantial evidence to support apportionment.
From the decision · page 11Based on the foregoing, we concur with the WCJ's determination that Drs. Hirsch and Fink have identified multiple preexisting nonindustrial factors as causative of applicant's current permanent disability. However, because neither the regular physician nor the QME offers an explanation of how they identified the extent to which each of those factors contributed to present permanent disability, expressed as an approximate percentage, the apportionment analysis is incomplete and cannot be adopted. (Escobedo, supra, 70 Cal.Comp.Cases at p. 621; Granado v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1968) 69 Cal.2d 647 [33 Cal.Comp.Cases 647] [Appeals Board may not rely on an apportionment opinion expressed as a mere legal conclusion].)