What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration of the Findings of Fact is denied.
Applicant seeks removal of the Findings of Fact issued by the WCJ on January 28, 2021, challenging denial of petition to strike the AME for conflict of interest; removal is rare and requires showing significant prejudice or irreparable harm; the WCJ recommended denial of removal.
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.
QME/AME processDefendant prevailedneck · upper extremities · back · shoulders · psyche
Applicant failed to meet burden of proof showing Dr. Gilberg had a disqualifying conflict of interest under AD Rule 41.5; Dr. Gilberg's lack of financial remuneration and no acceptance of network referrals supported impartiality.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks removal of the Findings of Fact issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on January 28, 2021. By the Findings of Fact, the WCJ found that there was no factual or legal basis to strike the agreed medical evaluator (AME) and denied applicant's petition to strike the AME.