Dr. Bernhard opined that applicant did sustain cumulative injury while employed by both Sierra Management and Porterville Sheltered Workshop.
Favours Applicant prevailed
The WCAB found Dr. Bernhard's opinion convincing and substantial evidence supporting compensability of cumulative trauma.
From the decision · page 4The key issue on this matter pertains to whether or not the applicant sustained cumulative
injury while employed by both Sierra Management and Porterville Sheltered Workshop.
Dr. Bernhard opined that applicant did sustain cumulative injury as claimed by CIGA. Dr. Sonu
opined that he did not.
Dr. Sonu opined that applicant did not sustain cumulative injury involving Porterville Sheltered Workshop.
Favours Defendant prevailed
The WCAB found Dr. Sonu's opinion less convincing compared to Dr. Bernhard's.
From the decision · page 4Petitioner seems to claim that the Findings of Fact are not justified as Dr. Sonu opined that
there was no cumulative trauma involving Porterville Sheltered Workshop. See Item C of Petition,
page 5. The fact of the matter is that such is the reason trials exist. Defendant CIGA could have
raised the same contention had it been found that there was no cumulative trauma related to the
Porterville Sheltered Workshop employment, The two doctors herein simply disagree. Dr. Sonu
finding no CT involving Porterville Sheltered Workshop, and Dr. Bernhard opining there was a
CT. Merely because one expert's opinion differed from that of another expert does not render
Findings of Fact invalid.
Dr. Woolf and Dr. Grails apportioned cumulative trauma as compensable consequences based on derivative injuries from the orthopedic standpoint.
Favours Applicant prevailed
Their opinions supported the finding of compensable cumulative trauma.
From the decision · page 6Between applicant and Manufactures,
Dr. Sonu, orthopedics
Dr. Bernhardt originally opined that applicant's residuals were as a result of the specific
injury (CIGA). Eventually, when provided with additional information, he opined that applicant's
residuals stemmed in part from non-industrial conditions but that he did suffer cumulative trauma
while employed by both Sierra (CIGA) and Porterville SW, (Manufacturers).
Dr. Woolf also apportioned to cumulative trauma as did Dr. Grails, based upon derivative
injuries from the orthopedic standpoint (compensable consequence).
In turn, Dr. Sonu opined that applicant's residuals all stemmed from the specific industrial
injury and non-industrial conditions.
The undersigned has reviewed the excellent briefs filed by both defense counsel and the medical
reports and depositions in question.
The deposition of Dr. Bernhard was taken and he stood by his opinions after detailed questioning.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This bolstered the credibility and weight of Dr. Bernhard's opinion.
From the decision · page 7The deposition of Dr. Berhard was taken and the parties had the opportunity to question
the doctor, in detail, regarding his opinions. The Dr. stood by his opinions.
Labor Code 3202 mandates liberal construction favoring the injured worker, and applicant met the burden of proof per LC 3202.5.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This legal standard supported the finding of compensability in favor of the applicant.
From the decision · page 7Labor Code § 3202 does mandate liberal construction of the code, generally tending to favor
the injured worker. Applicant, however, still has the burden of proving his claim per LC§ 3202.5.