Davis v. Interim Healthcare, 091500 CAWC, LAO 768192

Case DateSeptember 15, 2000
CourtCalifornia
MARY DAVIS Applicant,
vs.
INTERIM HEALTHCARE, ITT SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, INC.; WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANIES, Defendants.
Nos. LAO 748301, LAO 768192
California Workers Compensation Decisions
Workers Compensation Appeals Board State of California
September 15, 2000
          OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC)           MERLE C. RABINE, Chairman.          On July 7, 2000, the Board granted applicant's petition for reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 2, 2000. In the relevant portion of his decision, the WCJ stated that because Labor Code section 4062.9[1] was not listed by the parties as an issue at the mandatory settlement conference (MSC), it had been waived. In her petition for reconsideration, the applicant contends that she properly raised the section 4062.9 presumption at trial, as indicated by the October 21, 1999 Minutes of Hearing, and moreover, it need not be raised as a separate issue at any time, but is applicable by virtue of the statutory section alone.          Because of the important and novel legal issue presented, and in order to secure uniformity of decision in the future, the Chairman of the Board, upon a majority vote of its members, has reassigned this case to the Board as a whole for an en banc decision. (Lab. Code, §115.) Based on our review of the relevant statutory and case law, we conclude that, although the prudent practitioner should raise the section 4062.9 presumption at the time of the MSC, along with all other issues, the section 4062.9 presumption may first be raised at trial, but not for the first time on reconsideration.          I. BACKGROUND          Applicant sustained an admitted cumulative industrial injury to her low back, neck and left shoulder from October 8, 1996 through October 8, 1997 (LAO 748301), and an admitted specific injury to her left shoulder on October 8, 1997 (LAO 768192). Both injuries were sustained while applicant was employed as a nurse by Interim Healthcare, insured by ITT Specialty Risk Services from October 8, 1996 to September 26, 1997, and by Wausau Insurance Company from September 26, 1997 to October 8, 1997.          Applicant's primary treating physician for these industrial injuries was Dr. Robert Hunt. In his report dated March 23, 1999, Dr. Hunt stated that applicant's condition was permanent and stationary as of February 24, 1999, the date of his clinical evaluation. With respect to permanent disability, Dr. Hunt set forth various prophylactic work restrictions for the applicant's neck, spinal and shoulder injuries, and apportioned fifty percent of her right shoulder disability to a prior 1991 injury. Dr. Hunt also concluded that applicant was in need of further medical treatment, and that she was a candidate for vocational rehabilitation.          Dr. Hunt issued a supplemental report dated May 19, 1999. In that report, he disagreed with the opinion of Dr. Steven Wertheimer, defendant's qualified medical examiner (QME), as to applicant's permanent and stationary date, and with Dr. Wertheimer's assessment that applicant was not in need of a housekeeper to do her shopping and laundry. There was no indication that Dr. Hunt changed any of the conclusions reached in his March 23, 1999 report.          In Dr. Wertheimer's report of November 16, 1998, he concluded that applicant's condition was permanent and stationary, and that she was a qualified injured worker. Dr. Wertheimer prescribed future medical care in the form of light analgesic medications, and an occasional steroid injection, but stated that surgery was not recommended. He concluded, however, that physical therapy, which was being provided by Dr. Hunt, had not been effective. With respect to permanent disability, Dr. Wertheimer opined that applicant was precluded from performing various work activities, but to a lesser extent than set forth in the opinion of Dr. Hunt.          Dr. Wertheimer also submitted a report dated February 16, 1999, in which, among other things, he noted that his earlier report had omitted the restrictions regarding applicant's cervical spine. Dr. Wertheimer submitted a final...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT