ADJ10146961 · December 20, 2021

The WCJ found the applicant did not meet her burden of proof for a cumulative trauma injury to her psyche based on the totality of the record, including credible witness testimony and medical reports, and the WCAB affirmed this finding on reconsideration.

From the decision · page 3the applicant, born [], while employed during the period of August 25, 2015 through November 8, 2016, as a special ed instructional assistant, Occupational Group No. 214, at Lynwood, California, by Lynwood Unified School District, permissibly self-insured, administered by Keenan & Associates, did not sustain injury arising out of and in the course of employment to her psyche and internal.

The WCJ found the reporting of Dr. Freidman more persuasive than Dr. Ha'eri and denied permanent disability and future medical care, which was affirmed on reconsideration.

From the decision · page 5Applicant claims the WCJ should have decided permanent disability on the reporting of Dr. Ha'eri dated February 10, 2016 where in Dr. Ha'eri found muscle spasm, tenderness and guarding to the cervical spine and found a Category II, 5% whole person impairment. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). He returned her to full duties without any restrictions. (Exhibit "5", p. 3). Dr. Ha'eri stated 100% of the injury was caused by the specific injury, but had not reviewed any automobile accident records. Dr. Ha'eri did not discuss the "history of prior motor vehicle accident injuries" but mentioned them only in passing. However, the WCJ found the reporting of Marc Freidman, M.D. dated January 23, 2016 more persuasive. Dr. Freidman discussed the February 2, 2015 motor vehicle accident where Applicant had injuries to her neck and eye when she hit the steering wheel, with treatment for two months. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). Although the Applicant told Dr. Freidman of her subjective complaints of left sided stiffness and aching and "subjective sense of decreased sensation fourth and fifth fingers on the left, Dr. Freidman comments that he finds, "no true

The WCJ corrected a clerical error in the temporary disability period and found the applicant was temporarily disabled from July 10, 2015 through August 6, 2015, which was affirmed on reconsideration.

From the decision · page 23. Applicant was temporarily disabled from July 10, 2015 through August 6, 2015. ***

Applicant was hit in the head with a ball on May 21, 2015, causing injury to neck, left eye, and left shoulder.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This event established the date of injury and the basis for the temporary disability period and permanent disability evaluation.

From the decision · page 5Applicant testified that on May 21, 2015, applicant was hit in the head with a ball. As a result she hit her neck, left eye, and left shoulder. She continued treating past the school year for her injury of 2015. (MOH/SOE 1/20/21, p. 6, lines 6-8).

Applicant was temporarily disabled from July 10, 2015 through August 6, 2015, as corrected by the WCJ and affirmed by the WCAB.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This fact determined the correct period for temporary disability compensation.

From the decision · page 23. Applicant was temporarily disabled from July 10, 2015 through August 6, 2015. ***

The WCJ found the applicant did not meet her burden of proof for a cumulative trauma injury to her psyche based on the totality of the record, including credible witness testimony and medical reports.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This fact was central to denying the cumulative trauma claim and affirming the decision on reconsideration.

From the decision · page 17Based upon the totality of the record, including the credible witness testimony, the subpoenaed records of TobinLucks, the medical reporting of Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator Patrick Link, MD, the lack of credible testimony from the Applicant, and the lack of substantial medical reporting from Dr. Windman and Dr. Curtis, the WCJ found the applicant did not meet her burden of proof that she sustained injury arising out of and during the course of employment on a cumulative trauma basis to her psyche.

The WCJ found the reporting of Dr. Freidman more persuasive than Dr. Ha'eri and denied permanent disability and future medical care.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This fact determined the denial of permanent disability benefits and future medical care.

From the decision · page 5Applicant claims the WCJ should have decided permanent disability on the reporting of Dr. Ha'eri dated February 10, 2016 where in Dr. Ha'eri found muscle spasm, tenderness and guarding to the cervical spine and found a Category II, 5% whole person impairment. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). He returned her to full duties without any restrictions. (Exhibit "5", p. 3). Dr. Ha'eri stated 100% of the injury was caused by the specific injury, but had not reviewed any automobile accident records. Dr. Ha'eri did not discuss the "history of prior motor vehicle accident injuries" but mentioned them only in passing. However, the WCJ found the reporting of Marc Freidman, M.D. dated January 23, 2016 more persuasive. Dr. Freidman discussed the February 2, 2015 motor vehicle accident where Applicant had injuries to her neck and eye when she hit the steering wheel, with treatment for two months. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). Although the Applicant told Dr. Freidman of her subjective complaints of left sided stiffness and aching and "subjective sense of decreased sensation fourth and fifth fingers on the left, Dr. Freidman comments that he finds, "no true

Found no true radicular symptoms and no impairment; more complete and persuasive than Dr. Ha'eri's report; recommended no future medical care.

The WCJ found Dr. Freidman's report more complete and persuasive than Dr. Ha'eri's and relied upon it to deny permanent disability and future medical care.

From the decision · page 5Applicant claims the WCJ should have decided permanent disability on the reporting of Dr. Ha'eri dated February 10, 2016 where in Dr. Ha'eri found muscle spasm, tenderness and guarding to the cervical spine and found a Category II, 5% whole person impairment. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). He returned her to full duties without any restrictions. (Exhibit "5", p. 3). Dr. Ha'eri stated 100% of the injury was caused by the specific injury, but had not reviewed any automobile accident records. Dr. Ha'eri did not discuss the "history of prior motor vehicle accident injuries" but mentioned them only in passing. However, the WCJ found the reporting of Marc Freidman, M.D. dated January 23, 2016 more persuasive. Dr. Freidman discussed the February 2, 2015 motor vehicle accident where Applicant had injuries to her neck and eye when she hit the steering wheel, with treatment for two months. (Exhibit "5", p. 2). Although the Applicant told Dr. Freidman of her subjective complaints of left sided stiffness and aching and "subjective sense of decreased sensation fourth and fifth fingers on the left, Dr. Freidman comments that he finds, "no true

Found the cumulative trauma claim non-compensable and likely related to prior injury; report was well reasoned and complete; applicant lacked credibility.

The WCJ found Dr. Link's report well reasoned and substantial evidence, relying on it to deny the cumulative trauma claim.

From the decision · page 17Based upon the totality of the record, including the credible witness testimony, the subpoenaed records of TobinLucks, the medical reporting of Panel Qualified Medical Evaluator Patrick Link, MD, the lack of credible testimony from the Applicant, and the lack of substantial medical reporting from Dr. Windman and Dr. Curtis, the WCJ found the applicant did not meet her burden of proof that she sustained injury arising out of and during the course of employment on a cumulative trauma basis to her psyche.

Medical reports found not substantial evidence due to false and inaccurate history; lacked opportunity to review complete records.

The WCJ rejected Dr. Windman's reports as not substantial evidence due to inaccurate history and incomplete records.

From the decision · page 16Further, the WCJ did not find Gayle Windman Ph.D.'s or Thomas Curtis, MD's medical reports to be substantial evidence as they were working with a false and inaccurate history. The applicant refused to go into details regarding her childhood and they did not have the opportunity to review the 3900 plus pages reviewed by the more persuasive Patrick Link, MD.

Medical reports found not substantial evidence due to false and inaccurate history; lacked opportunity to review complete records; applicant refused to discuss childhood traumas.

The WCJ rejected Dr. Curtis's reports as not substantial evidence due to inaccurate history, incomplete records, and applicant's refusal to discuss traumas.

From the decision · page 16Further, the WCJ did not find Gayle Windman Ph.D.'s or Thomas Curtis, MD's medical reports to be substantial evidence as they were working with a false and inaccurate history. The applicant refused to go into details regarding her childhood and they did not have the opportunity to review the 3900 plus pages reviewed by the more persuasive Patrick Link, MD.

Place v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 372, 378-379 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 525]

The relevant and considered opinion of one physician may constitute substantial evidence, even if inconsistent with other medical opinions.

The WCJ and WCAB relied on this standard to weigh conflicting medical opinions and find substantial evidence in Dr. Link's and Dr. Freidman's reports.

From the decision · page 1We observe, moreover, it is well-established that the relevant and considered opinion of one physician may constitute substantial evidence, even if inconsistent with other medical opinions. (Place v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 372, 378-379 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 525].)

Applicant's lack of credibility and inconsistent testimony regarding workplace events and psychiatric injury claims.

From the decision · page 16Given there was not any evidence to confirm Applicant's allegations, other than her unsupported testimony, when compared with the testimony of the witness, and the subpoenaed records of [Tobin Lucks], (Exhibit "J"), which shows the Applicant's many psyche claims against other employers, law suits against friends and complaints against workers' compensation judges and Information & Assistant Officers, complaints against at least 4 prior attorneys and the Applicant's inability to get along with basically anyone she comes in contact with, and considering the reporting of Dr. Link, the WCJ did not find the Applicant's testimony regarding actual events at the workplace credible. During trial the WCJ was able to evaluate and consider Applicant's and all the witness demeanor and presentation.

Medical reports of Dr. Link found well reasoned and substantial evidence; reports of Drs. Windman and Curtis found not substantial evidence due to false and inaccurate history.

From the decision · page 16Further, the WCJ did not find Gayle Windman Ph.D.'s or Thomas Curtis, MD's medical reports to be substantial evidence as they were working with a false and inaccurate history. The applicant refused to go into details regarding her childhood and they did not have the opportunity to review the 3900 plus pages reviewed by the more persuasive Patrick Link, MD.