Here are some recent noteworthy panel decisions issued by the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. If you would like a copy of any of these decisions, please email me or post a comment to this blog with your request. If you haven't registered at this site yet, you must do so before you can logon to post a comment. Registration at our web center is free.

Loretta Little v. Oakland Unified School District

Jurisdiction—Five-Year Statute of Limitations—WCAB held that WCJ had jurisdiction to make  initial award of temporary total disability indemnity to applicant/custodian with admitted industrial injuries to upper extremities on 5/14/2000 and 8/18/2000, for period of temporary total disability originating more than five years after applicant's date of injury, when no prior awards of temporary disability indemnity had been issued to applicant, and WCAB found that decisions in Nickelsberg v. W.C.A.B. (1991) 51 Cal. 3d 288, 794 P.2d 925, 272 Cal. Rptr. 167, 56 Cal. Comp. Cases 476 and Hartsuiker v. W.C.A.B. (1993) 12 Cal. App. 4th 209, 15 Cal. Rtpr. 2d 719, 58 Cal. Comp. Cases 19,  precluding awards for periods of temporary disability arising more than five years from date of injury under Labor Code §§ 5410 and 5803 after final award of temporary disability is issued, did not bar WCAB in this case because applicant did not seek to reopen based upon additional temporary disability but rather made initial claim for temporary disability, and that five-year time limitation in Labor Code § 4656(b) did not bar applicant's initial claim for temporary disability benefits as this limitation expressly applies only to temporary partial disability awards and does not preclude award of temporary total disability.

Elena Mateu v. University California San Francisco

Vocational Rehabilitation—Repeal of Labor Code § 139.5—WCAB rescinded WCJ's decision approving parties' stipulations, returned matter to trial level for WCJ to conduct further proceedings to determine whether there was good cause to set aside stipulations based upon mutual mistake of fact, and stated that WCJ may consider application of  Weiner v. Ralph's Company (2009) 74 Cal. Comp. Cases 736 (Appeals Board en banc opinion) (regarding 1/1/2009 repeal of Labor Code § 139.5) in deciding this case.

Karen L. Moran v. County of Los Angeles/Probation Department

Discovery—Closure of Discovery—WCAB denied applicant's petition for removal from WCJs' orders compelling applicant's attendance at defense qualified medical examination issued after matter was taken off calendar at mandatory settlement conference (MSC) pursuant to request of both parties, when, despite applicant's contention that she was not required to attend examination because discovery was closed at MSC under Labor Code § 5502(e)(3), WCAB found that rules of discovery do not apply to cases taken off calendar at MSC absent stipulation by parties to close discovery, and that applicant failed to show order would result in substantial prejudice or irreparable harm so as to justify removal.

Carmencita Fortuno v. Getz Corp.

Removal—WCAB denied defendant's request for removal from WCJ's order vacating submission of case for further development of record in connection with applicant's industrial injuries to bilateral upper extremities, bilateral carpal tunnel and psyche through cumulative period 5/13/98, when WCJ ordered further development of record on ground that he could not determine applicant's entitlement to a functional restoration program based on existing record, and WCAB found that defendant failed to show WCJ's order to develop medical record would result in significant prejudice or irreparable harm  as required under 8 Cal. Code Reg. § 10843 to justify removal, and made no showing that reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy after a final award is issued.

Medical Treatment—Utilization Review—Time to Deny Treatment Request—WCAB disagreed with WCJ's finding that  utilization review report denying authorization for functional restoration program in connection with applicant's industrial injuries to bilateral upper extremities, bilateral carpal tunnel and psyche through cumulative period 5/13/98 was untimely under Labor Code § 4610(g), when request for authorization did not specify name of claims adjuster or insurer or the address that it was transmitted to,  there was insufficient evidence to indicate that defendant received report directly from requesting physician, applicant's primary treating physician sent a copy of requesting physician's report to defendant on 7/5/2007 seeking authorization for functional restoration program, and WCAB found that 7/11/2007 utilization review denial was timely as to primary treating physician's 7/5/2007 request; WCAB returned matter to trial level, instructing WCJ to consider utilization review report in reaching a final decision.

© Copyright 2009 LexisNexis. All rights reserved.