APD 220143
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision to reconstruct the record. The Appeals Panel noted that the number of pages indicated on the exhibit list did not match the number of pages in the exhibits.
APD 220173
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision regarding impairment rating. The Appeals Panel noted that the certifying doctor did not accurately reflect the impairment assessed for the right hip flexion and adduction range of motions measured.
APD 220145
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision regarding impairment rating because the certifying doctor provided conflicting extension measurements for the claimant’s right hip.
APD 220140
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision regarding the extent of injury to a disc herniation because there was no causation evidence.
APD 220154
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision regarding the certification of maximum medical (MMI) improvement and impairment rating because of an internal inconsistency between the MMI date on the DWC-69 and the MMI date certified in the narrative report.
APD 220046
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 220068
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision on maximum medical improvement and impairment rating because of internal inconsistencies in the adopted doctor’s report. Specifically, the date of maximum medical improvement was different on the DWC-69 from the date in the narrative report.
APD 220075
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge because of a misapplication of the AMA Guides by the certifying doctor in the adopted report. Specifically, the certifying doctor used range of motion measurements from a previous physical therapy note that was not in evidence.
APD 212101
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision to reconstruct the record. The Appeals Panel noted that the number of pages indicated on the exhibit list did not match the number of pages in the exhibits.
APD 212095
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s extent-of-injury determination as incomplete. The Appeals Panel noted that the decision did not contain any findings of fact, conclusions of law, or a decision regarding specific conditions listed in the issue.