What the panel ordered
Findings and Award of February 4, 2021 affirmed except amended to increase permanent disability rating to 71% without apportionment; award includes life pension and attorney's fee subject to adjustment.
Petition for Reconsideration filed by applicant challenging WCJ's reliance on Dr. Anderson's apportionment opinion; WCJ's Findings and Award of February 4, 2021 reviewed and reconsidered by WCAB panel.
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.
Dr. Anderson's apportionment opinion was found not to be substantial evidence due to lack of detailed reasoning, internal contradictions, and speculative nature, failing the Escobedo standard.
From the decision · page 7In Escobedo v. Marshalls (2005) 70 Cal.Comp.Cases 604 [Appeals Board en banc], the Board discussed the following requirements for a medical opinion to be considered substantial evidence of apportionment:
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.