No. 03536695 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Berkys Padilla.

• Case Date: January 26, 1999
• Court: Massachusetts

Massachusetts Workers Compensation 1999. No. 03536695 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Berkys Padilla COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS EMPLOYEE: Berkys Padilla EMPLOYER: Mellon Bank Corporation INSURER: Aetna Casualty and SuretyBOARD NO. 03536695REVIEWING BOARD DECISION (Judges Carroll, Levine and Maze-Rothstein)APPEARANCES Lazar Lowinger, Esq., for the employee at hearing Martin J. Long, Esq., for the employee on appeal Gail E. Quinn, Esq., for the insurer CARROLL, J. The employee appeals a decision awarding her a closed period of weekly benefits for a work related injury to her back, neck and head, but denying her claim for an emotional injury arising out of that accident. The employee argues that the administrative judge erred by rejecting, for reasons not based in the evidence, the uncontroverted medical opinions of two expert psychiatrists causally connecting the employee's emotional impairment with the industrial injury. The employee's argument has merit and we therefore recommit the case for further proceedings. The employee, Berkys Padilla, worked for Mellon Bank Corporation ("the employer"), doing data entry, record keeping, bookkeeping and filing. (Dec. 4.) On August 22, 1995, she fell down stairs at work, sustaining a cervical strain, lumbar strain and post-concussive headaches. (Dec. 2, 4, 7.) The insurer initially denied liability, but accepted the claim for physical injury at hearing. (Dec. 4.) At hearing, the employee alleged that she was temporarily and totally incapacitated by virtue of both physical injuries and an emotional injury which she alleged was related to her physical injuries. The judge allowed the employee's motion to join a claim for emotional injury prior to the hearing. The judge's decision ordered a closed period of § 34 temporary total benefits for the physical injuries only. The judge terminated benefits on the date of the § 11A(2) medical examination, when the impartial examiner, Dr. Kenneth Gorsen, found "the employee with some discomfort only which does not impair her from a return to work." (Dec. 8.) The judge rejected the employee's claim for emotional sequelae to the accepted physical injuries. The focus of the employee's appeal concerns the denial of the employee's claim for an emotional injury. The judge concluded that the employee's emotional claim: fail[ed] because...