ADJ10856264 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's Findings and Award and denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration.

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.

Permanent disability ratingApplicant prevailedbilateral shoulders · bilateral elbows · bilateral wrists · left middle finger · bilateral hands · right shoulder

The WCJ's finding of 100% permanent disability was supported by credible testimony and vocational expert opinion, which rebutted the AMA Guides rating of 62%. The WCJ's rejection of Dr. Tran's apportionment was due to lack of substantial medical evidence explaining the causal relationship of prior surgeries to current disability.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

Dr. Tran's apportionment of 50% for right shoulder disability lacked substantial medical evidence explaining causal relationship to prior surgeries.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This led to rejection of the apportionment and supported the finding of permanent total disability without apportionment.

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.

QMERejected · orthopedic

Dr. Tran evaluated applicant's bilateral upper extremity injuries, imposed work restrictions precluding heavy and repetitive activities, and apportioned 50% of right shoulder disability to prior non-industrial surgeries but did not change impairment ratings despite worsening condition.

Dr. Tran's apportionment lacked substantial medical evidence explaining the causal relationship to prior surgeries, leading to its rejection.

From the decision · page 2In his initial evaluation in September of 2017, Dr. Tran reviewed the history of applicant's injury and the surgical treatment for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, ulnar nerve neuropathy, and in his left shoulder, "extensive tearing of the infraspinatus tendon with anterior labral tear and subcoracoid impingement and calcific tendinitis." (Jt. Ex. 3, 9/16/17 Dr. Tran QME Report, p. 2.) At the time of his evaluation, Dr. Tran described applicant's pain complaints in his bilateral shoulders, elbows and wrists as being aggravated by "heavy lifting, overhead activities, activities involving gripping, grasping, holding onto things, and repetitive activities." He characterized applicant's complaints then as "slight, moderate, and intermittent, progressing to moderate and frequent with those precipitating factors." Dr. Tran precluded applicant from heavy work, and repetitive activities involving "gripping, grasping, holding, or any overhead or over shoulder activities." (Jt. Ex. 3. p. 11.)

PTPGiven great weight

Dr. Mazur treated applicant and noted worsening condition, recommending further diagnostic studies.

From the decision · page 8In his most recent evaluating report, Dr. Tran noted a more restricted range of motion and weakness in the applicant's handgrip. (Jt. Exh. 1, Dr. Mazur, 10/18/19.) Dr. Tran reported an increase in the applicant's right shoulder pain and an exacerbation of his conditions due to daily living activities. (Id.) He opined that the applicant has sustained a disability to his bilateral shoulders, elbows, and wrists, precluding him from heavy work and also precluding him from repetitive type of activities, including gripping, grasping, holding, or any overhead/over shoulder activities. (Id.) However, his prior impairment ratings remained unchanged.

ADJ10856264 · July 26, 2021

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

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

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page