Dr. Miles apportioned 60% of the disability to the cumulative trauma injury and 40% to the specific injury based on extensive medical record review.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This medical opinion was relied upon by the WCJ as substantial evidence for apportionment between the two injuries.
From the decision · page 6It is my opinion that for a period of at least one year prior to his work claim
he was developing mild symptoms of ha.ck and neck pain that came to the
fore once he sustained his work injury on 8/14/20. Approximately 60% of
his current disability in my opinion came about cumulatively with 40% a
consequence of his specific work injury.
(Joint Exhibit J3, Dr. Miles, January 18, 2023, page 9.)
No employment or wage records were submitted to confirm applicant's prior employment history for further apportionment of the cumulative trauma injury among multiple employers.
Favours Defendant prevailed
Lack of such evidence made further apportionment speculative and unsupported by substantial evidence.
From the decision · page 8However, Dr. Miles' reports do not include review of applicant's prior employment records to
confirm applicant's statement to him about his employment history. Nowhere in the 1,000+ pages
of records reviewed by Dr. Miles was it listed that any employment or wage information was
reviewed. And, although Dr. Miles reviewed the applicant's deposition transcript for his initial
report, the deposition transcript was not submitted into evidence at Trial, and applicant did not
testify at Trial. As such, Dr. Miles' statements that he would apportion the CT injury equally
between multiple employers is not supported by substantial evidence, but solely on applicant's
verbal statements to him during the first evaluation. Without confirmation of applicant's
employment history, further apportionment of the 60% would be speculative.
Applicant did not testify at trial and his deposition transcript was not admitted into evidence, limiting evidence on employment history.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This limited the defendant's ability to prove further apportionment among prior employers.
From the decision · page 6Applicant was not called as a witness at Trial. (MOH/SOE, page 1, line 38.) Applicant's deposition
transcript was not admitted into evidence. (MOH/SOE, page 4, lines 9 thru 13.) Applicant provided
an offer of proof at Trial stating, "Prior to his injury of August 14, 2020, he had never suffered an
injury to his neck or back as a consequence of any work he had ever done." (MOH/SOE, page 4,
lines 18-26.) There was no objection to the offer of proof.