What the panel ordered
Decision after reconsideration affirms the WCJ's findings except amends the apportionment of psychiatric disability, increasing permanent disability rating to 71%.
Petition for reconsideration filed by applicant, decision after reconsideration issued by the Appeals Board affirming in part and amending the WCJ's findings.
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. Petrakis's opinion on apportionment of psychiatric disability is not substantial evidence because it relied on an incorrect premise that worry related to the industrial injury can be a basis for non-industrial apportionment.
From the decision · page 2However, we find merit in applicant's contention that defendant failed to meet its burden of proving apportionment of the psychiatric permanent disability. (Kopping v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1114 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 1229].) For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that Dr. Petrakis's opinion on apportionment of the psychiatric disability is not substantial evidence. Without apportionment of the psychiatric disability, applicant is entitled to a permanent disability award of 71 percent. We will amend the WCJ's decision accordingly.