 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Knouse v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board11/7/2005
Carter Knouse (Claimant) petitions for review of the May 9, 2005, order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB) reversing the June 14, 2004, decision of a workers' compensation judge (WCJ) to grant Claimant's review petition and amend the description of Claimant's work-related injury. We reverse.
Claimant sustained work-related injuries on May 16, 1996, when he was involved in a motor vehicle accident while driving a tractor-trailer truck for G.O.D., Inc. (Employer). This case involves three decisions rendered by the same WCJ with respect to that work injury.
In his first decision, circulated on August 14, 1998 (1998 Decision), the WCJ granted Claimant's claim petition and denied Employer's petition for a termination of benefits. Accepting the testimony of Claimant and his treating physician Mohammad Aslam, M.D., as credible, the WCJ made the following relevant finding.
30. Claimant sustained the following conditions as a result of the May 16, 1996, injury:
(a) Sprained left ankle;
(b) Sprained low back; and
(c) A cervical strain
Dr. Aslam also mentioned this EMG findings showed inflammation of the fifth lumbar route.
Reasoning: Dr. Aslam's opinion that Claimant also sustained a disk herniation at L4-L5 level . as a result of the work injury was not found to be credible and persuasive due primarily to the Claimant's ability to continue to work. Dr. Aslam's opinion regarding this aspect of the Claimant's condition was found less credible and less persuasive than the contrary opinion of Dr. Yarus concerning the extent of Claimant's work injury. Furthermore, Dr. Aslam did not credibly and persuasively explain in medical terms how the work injury resulted in a disk herniation at L4-L5..
(1998 Decision, WCJ's Findings of Fact, Nos. 28, 30) (emphasis added).
The WCJ concluded that Claimant sustained his burden of proving a compensable work-related injury and, rejecting the testimony of Employer's medical witness that Claimant recovered from that injury, the WCJ ordered Employer to pay Claimant total disability benefits from November 11, 1996, and partial disability upon Claimant's return to work for J.A. Strouse Auto Sales (Strouse). Neither party appealed from the 1998 Decision.
In his second decision, circulated on August 13, 2002 (2002 Decision), the WCJ granted Claimant's reinstatement petition, which alleged that, as of August 28, 2001, he was no longer able to perform the work for Strouse and was again totally disabled. The WCJ also denied Employer's second termination petition.
In support of his reinstatement petition and in defending against Employer's termination petition, Claimant testified and presented the December 18, 2001, deposition testimony of a second treating physician, Robert W. Mauthe, M.D. Accepting the testimony of Claimant and Dr. Mauthe and rejecting the testimony of Employer's medical witness, the WCJ made the following relevant findings.
20. The Claimant continued to perform this job for Strouse despite having difficulties . but his condition has worsened as of October 29, 2001. . Claimant's testimony concerning the change in his condition was not rebutted by any persuasive medical testimony. . .
34. . Dr. Mauthe had last seen the Claimant on August 17, 2001. . At that time, Dr. Mauthe diagnosed the Claimant with chronic pain syndrome and concluded that the Claimant was unable to participate in any form of regular sustained gainful employment. .
36. On May 16, 1996, the Claimant sustained a sprained left ankle, cervical strain, and lumbar strain as a result of a moto
Page 1 2 3 4 Pennsylvania Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|