Rocha v. Magadia Consulting Inc Erie Ins Exchange, 031921 VAWC, VA00001706479

Case DateMarch 19, 2021
CourtVirginia
RAFAEL ROCHA
v.
MAGADIA CONSULTING INC ERIE INS EXCHANGE, Insurance Carrier
ERIE INS EXCHANGE, Claim Administrator
Jurisdiction Claim No. VA00001706479
Claim Administrator File No. A00002453446
Virginia Workers’ Compensation
Virginia In The Workers’ Compensation Commission
March 19, 2021
          Date of Injury February 3, 2020           Andrew S. Kasmer, Esquire For the Claimant.           Justin R. Main, Esquire For the Defendants.           REVIEW on the record by Commissioner Marshall, Commissioner Newman, and Commissioner Rapaport at Richmond, Virginia.           OPINION           MARSHALL Commissioner          The defendants request review of a Staff Attorney’s December 21, 2020 rejection of an Employer’s Application for Hearing filed December 2, 2020. We AFFIRM.          I. Material Proceedings          The Commission approved a Stipulated Order on June 12, 2020.[1] It confirmed the claimant sustained a compensable left shoulder injury on February 3, 2020. The parties stipulated the claimant was entitled to temporary total disability from February 4, 2020 and continuing. They agreed the defendants would pay Inova Mount Vernon, M.M. Malek, M.D., and Dynamic Rehab for medical treatment under the Virginia Fee Schedule. The claimant was permitted to continue treatment with Dr. Malek until the defendants could arrange an appointment with an agreed upon provider. He would then receive “reasonable, necessary and causally related medical treatment from Dr. Avery, Dr. Miyamoto, or another physician agreed upon by the parties.”          The defendants filed a December 2, 2020 Employer’s Application for Hearing. It alleged the claimant unjustifiably refused medical treatment offered by Dr. Miyamoto/Rehab at Work on November 30, 2020. The defendants enclosed Dr. Miyamoto’s November 16, 2020 Order for Work Conditioning/ Work Hardening which followed left shoulder surgery. They included correspondence between claimant’s counsel and defense counsel discussing the appropriate provider. The claimant argued Dynamic Rehab was the established physical therapy provider. The defendants argued...

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