What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration granted, WCJ's August 26, 2024 Findings and Order rescinded, matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings
Petition for reconsideration granted, WCJ's August 26, 2024 Findings and Order rescinded, matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings
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.
The WCJ's finding of no compensable psychiatric injury was rescinded due to lack of a QME evaluation, and the matter was returned for further proceedings to develop the record properly.
From the decision · page 4II. The determination of compensability, the existence or extent of permanent impairment, and limitations, if any, resulting from an injury all require a medical evaluation. When deciding a medical issue, including whether applicant sustained a compensable psychiatric injury, the WCJ must utilize expert medical opinion. (See Insurance Company of North America v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kemp) (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 905, 911-912 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 913].) Here, applicant requested a QME panel in the specialty of psychiatry, the parties exercised their respective strikes, and Dr. Sidle remained. Thereafter, applicant filed a request for a new panel on the basis that Dr. Sidle had retired as a QME. At the time of trial, applicant alleged that she was still awaiting evaluation by a QME, which had not been authorized. (MOH/SOE, May 1, 2024 trial, p. 3.) As an unrepresented employee, applicant would require an evaluation by a QME to determine compensability, if any, and the existence or extent of permanent impairment.