ADJ11055389 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for reconsideration granted; WCJ decision amended to defer permanent disability and apportionment issues with jurisdiction reserved; further medical treatment awarded.

Petition for reconsideration of WCJ Findings and Awards of January 3, 2025 granted; permanent disability and apportionment issues deferred for further record development.

Read the official decision →

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.

Permanent disability ratingRemandedback · left shoulder · bilateral shoulders · bilateral wrists · bilateral knees · neck

The WCJ's permanent disability rating was deferred due to insufficient development of the record on the application of the Combined Values Chart and apportionment, requiring further analysis under the Vigil en banc decision.

From the decision · page 5For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of the Findings and Awards of January 3, 2025 is GRANTED.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.

AMERecord developed further · orthopedist

Dr. Hasday opined that the applicant's low back and lower extremity impairments should be combined using the Combined Values Chart, and the neck and upper extremity impairments should also be combined separately, then these two groups should be added rather than combined. He also apportioned disability pursuant to Labor Code section 4663 to nonindustrial factors and between the two industrial injuries.

Dr. Hasday provided a detailed rebuttal of the use of the Combined Values Chart based on activities of daily living overlap, which the WCJ initially rejected but the WCAB found required further development under the Vigil decision.

From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's (WCJ) Findings and Awards of January 3, 2025 in cases ADJ11055389 and ADJ11054646.1 In case ADJ11055389, it was found that while employed on November 1, 2016 as a maintenance worker, applicant sustained industrial injury to his back and left shoulder causing permanent disability of 13% and the need for further medical treatment. In case ADJ110554646, it was found that while employed during a cumulative period ending November 17, 2016, applicant sustained industrial injury to his shoulders, wrists, knees, back and neck causing permanent disability of 93% and the need for further medical treatment. The findings of permanent disability were based on the impairment ratings and apportionment determination of agreed medical evaluator orthopedist Chester A. Hasday, M.D., who apportioned pursuant to Labor Code section 4663 both to nonindustrial factors and between the two industrial injuries. Dr. Hasday opined that applicant's low back and lower extremity impairments should have been combined using the Combined Values Chart and the neck and upper extremity impairments should also be combined with the Combined Values Chart and these two groups of impairments should be added rather than combined. However, the WCJ rated the impairments by combining all impairments utilizing the Combined Values Chart.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Labor Code section 5909

Labor Code section 5909 requires the Appeals Board to act on a petition for reconsideration within 60 days of transmission of the case to the Appeals Board.

The Board timely acted on the petition for reconsideration filed by the applicant within the 60-day period.

From the decision · page 2Here, according to Events, the case was transmitted to the Appeals Board on February 5, 2025 and 60 days from the date of transmission is Sunday April 6, 2025. The next business day that is 60 days from the date of transmission is Monday April 7, 2025. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10600(b).)2 This decision is issued by or on Monday April 7, 2025, so we have timely acted on the petition as required by Labor Code section 5909(a).

Labor Code section 4663

Labor Code section 4663 governs apportionment of permanent disability to nonindustrial factors and between industrial injuries.

Dr. Hasday apportioned disability pursuant to Labor Code section 4663 to nonindustrial factors and between the two industrial injuries.

From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of a workers' compensation administrative law judge's (WCJ) Findings and Awards of January 3, 2025 in cases ADJ11055389 and ADJ11054646.1 In case ADJ11055389, it was found that while employed on November 1, 2016 as a maintenance worker, applicant sustained industrial injury to his back and left shoulder causing permanent disability of 13% and the need for further medical treatment. In case ADJ110554646, it was found that while employed during a cumulative period ending November 17, 2016, applicant sustained industrial injury to his shoulders, wrists, knees, back and neck causing permanent disability of 93% and the need for further medical treatment. The findings of permanent disability were based on the impairment ratings and apportionment determination of agreed medical evaluator orthopedist Chester A. Hasday, M.D., who apportioned pursuant to Labor Code section 4663 both to nonindustrial factors and between the two industrial injuries. Dr. Hasday opined that applicant's low back and lower extremity impairments should have been combined using the Combined Values Chart and the neck and upper extremity impairments should also be combined with the Combined Values Chart and these two groups of impairments should be added rather than combined. However, the WCJ rated the impairments by combining all impairments utilizing the Combined Values Chart.

Vigil v. County of Kern (2024) 89 Cal.Comp.Cases 686 (Appeals Bd. en banc)

Vigil v. County of Kern (2024) 89 Cal.Comp.Cases 686 (Appeals Bd. en banc) sets the standard for rebutting the Combined Values Chart based on overlap of activities of daily living impacted by multiple impairments.

The WCAB found that further development of the record was necessary to apply the Vigil standard to the applicant's permanent disability rating and apportionment issues.

From the decision · page 5For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of the Findings and Awards of January 3, 2025 is GRANTED.

ADJ11055389 · April 7, 2025

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page