What the panel ordered
The November 8, 2021 Findings, Award, and Order is rescinded and the matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the opinion to issue a new decision.
Defendant sought reconsideration of the Findings, Award, and Order issued by the WCJ on November 8, 2021, which found that the AME's opinions on apportionment were not substantial evidence and awarded combined permanent disability.
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 WCJ and WCAB found that the AME Dr. Sommer's opinions on apportionment lacked the necessary explanation required by Escobedo to be substantial evidence, leading to rescission and remand for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 4Here, as the WCJ stated in the Opinion on Decision, Dr. Sommer "...does not address the requirements set out in Escobedo, in that his opinions generally leave out,... the necessary explanation of why and how the pathology and prior injury result in the current disability, and why and how these conditions lead him to choose the percentages that he does." (F&A, pp. 7 § 8, Opinion on Decision.) In his Report, the WCJ explained, "Considering that the missing analysis here is required by Escobedo to find that the opinion is substantial evidence, these faults are fatal to the substantiality of his opinion on apportionment of disability in the back." (Report, p. 3.)