 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Grupe Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board9/15/2005
op expert testimony prior to the settlement conference, a WCJ may allow the deposition of the expert after the mandatory settlement conference or even exclude the witness's testimony as antithetical to the aim of fruitful settlement discussions.
IV.
Petitioners also argue the medical opinion of Weitz constituted substantial evidence and contend the WCAB "completely failed to take into account the credibility determination previously made by the trial judge . . . ." In a related argument, petitioners argue the WCAB erred in ordering further development of the record.
The WCAB reviewed the chronology of Weitz's testimony and found his report on Ridgeway's disability "stale." In light of the deficiency of Weitz's testimony, the WCAB ordered further development of the record.
In considering a petition for a writ of review of a WCAB decision, our authority is limited. We must determine whether the evidence, when viewed in light of the entire record, supports the award of the WCAB. We may not reweigh the evidence or decide disputed questions of fact. However, we are not bound to accept the WCAB's factual findings if we determine they are unreasonable, illogical, improbable, or inequitable when viewed in light of the overall statutory scheme. (Mote v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 902, 909.)
Weitz last evaluated Ridgeway in May 2000. His opinion concerning Ridgeway's condition did not change from his initial report in November 1998. Given the time gap between Weitz's last report and the hearings in August and September 2000, we cannot find the WCAB's characterization of Weitz's testimony is unreasonable, illogical, improbable, or inequitable. The WCAB did not "fail to take into account the credibility determination previously made by the trial judge" as petitioners assert. The WCAB simply disagreed with the WCJ's analysis of the timeliness of Weitz's report.
As petitioners acknowledge, the WCAB may order additional evidence when the record lacks substantial evidence. (San Bernardino Community Hospital v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 928, 937-938.) Since the WCAB found Weitz's report stale, it established that a specific medical opinion was incomplete, meeting the threshold requirement for directing augmentation of the record. We find no error in the WCAB's directions to the WCJ on remand to obtain updated medical evidence. We note this does not include additional evidence on the vocational feasibility issue.
DISPOSITION
The petition is denied. Ridgeway is awarded costs on appeal.
We concur: MORRISON, J., ROBIE, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|