APD 220994
The Appeals’ Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision regarding finality. The Appeals’ Panel reasoned that “verifiable means” concerns proof of delivery and not proof of receipt.
APD 221039
The Appeals’ Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision to correct a clerical error regarding the date of maximum medical improvement.
APD 221062
The Appeals Panel affirmed the administrative law judge’s determinations on extent of injury and maximum medical improvement, holding that the compensable injury did not extend to the additional shoulder and wrist conditions and that the claimant reached MMI on August 25, 2021. However, the Panel reversed the impairment rating determination, concluding that the ALJ relied on an incorrect certification from the designated doctor.
APD 220999
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge to make a mathematical correction to the certification of maximum medical improvement / impairment rating.
APD 221060
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge because there was no certification in evidence rating the compensable injury in the case.
APD 221118
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge regarding impairment rating because the certifying doctor did not make clinical findings in the narrative for all compensable injuries.
APD 220948
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge because there was no certification in evidence rating the compensable injury in the case.
APD 220934
The Appeals’ Panel reversed the decision because the administrative law judge incorrectly required expert witness testimony to prove a strain/sprain injury.
APD 220810
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision regarding impairment rating because the adopted certification did not accurately reflect the impairment assessed for the left hip internal rotation and external rotation range-of-motion measured.
APD 220907
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision regarding maximum medical improvement and impairment rating because the adopted certification was based on bilateral wrist pain, not bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which was the compensable injury in this case.