What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The WCJ's July 16, 2013 decision barred a cumulative trauma claim (ADJ8143323) by Statute of Limitations, but this claim involved different body parts and dates than the two specific injuries in ADJ325769 and ADJ812096.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This distinction means the barred cumulative trauma claim does not preclude compensation for the specific injuries in the two cases, undermining the WCJ's basis for denying permanent disability benefits.
Dr. Brourman found the two stipulated specific injuries were actually cumulative traumas ending on the same dates as the specific injuries.
Favours Applicant prevailed
The WCJ relied on this opinion to deny permanent disability benefits, but the Board found this reliance erroneous because the barred cumulative trauma claim does not bar compensation for the specific injuries.
From the decision · page 2Notwithstanding that applicant has sustained two industrial injuries, which admittedly
resulted in some degree of permanent disability, the WCJ disallowed permanent disability benefits
altogether - for two reasons. First, Dr. Brourman, the Agreed Medical Evaluator ("AME") in
orthopedics concluded that, as opposed to two specific injuries, applicant sustained cumulative
trauma to his bilateral wrists "through May 18, 1999" and to his left elbow and left shoulder
"through January 11, 2001." (WCAB Exhibit II, Brourman report dated August 13, 2019, pp. 68-
69.)2 Secondly, the WCJ found in her now-final Findings and Order of July 16, 2013 in
ADJ8143323 that applicant sustained injury to both upper extremities during the period August
28, 1986 through November 18, 2001, and that this claim (ADJ8143323) was barred by the Statute
of Limitations. The WCJ reasoned that since Dr.
The parties stipulated to permanent disability for psychiatric injuries at 5.5% each and acknowledged permanent disability for orthopedic injuries, though extent was undetermined.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This supports the conclusion that permanent disability benefits should not be disallowed outright and that the cases should be returned for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 2As noted in the WCJ's Report, the parties stipulated that applicant sustained industrial
injury to his psyche and both wrists on May 18, 1999 (ADJ325769) and to his left elbow, left
shoulder and psyche on January 11, 2001 (ADJ812096). The parties also stipulated that each of
the two psychiatric injuries resulted in permanent disability of five and one-half percent, and that
the two orthopedic injuries resulted in permanent disability, but the nature and extent of disability
was not agreed upon. (See Minutes of Hearing, 6/5/14, pp. 4-7.)