 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
McAdoo v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board11/25/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
PROCEEDINGS to review a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Annulled and remanded with directions.
Petitioner, LaVerne McAdoo (McAdoo), claims that she injured her right hand and wrist while working as an employment representative for respondent, United Airlines (United). McAdoo reported the injury as industrial to United after receiving a notice of no pay status but before notice of layoff. United denied the claim based on Labor Code section 3600, subdivision (a)(10). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) concluded that McAdoo in effect reported the industrial injury after receiving notice of layoff, and the claim was barred by section 3600, subdivision (a)(10). The WCAB also determined that the exception under section 3600, subdivision (a)(10)(B) did not apply because McAdoo's medical records prior to the layoff notice did not contain sufficient evidence of the injury.
McAdoo petitions for writ of review. McAdoo contends that section 3600, subdivision (a)(10), does not apply since she reported the industrial injury after receiving the notice of no pay status, but before the layoff notice. Even if she received the notice of layoff before reporting the industrial injury, McAdoo contends further that her medical records prior to the notice contain evidence of the injury under section 3600, subdivision (a)(10)(B).
United answers that McAdoo knew to promptly report industrial injury, but waited until after notice of layoff. In addition, McAdoo's medical records stated there was no injury or trauma. Thus, McAdoo's claim is barred by section 3600, subdivision (a)(10).
We conclude substantial evidence does not support the finding that McAdoo reported the industrial injury after receiving notice of layoff. Therefore, section 3600, subdivision (a)(10), does not bar McAdoo's claim. We also conclude that McAdoo's medical records prior to the layoff contain evidence of the injury to the right hand and wrist, within the meaning of section 3600, subdivision (a)(10)(B). Accordingly, the WCAB's decision is annulled and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
McAdoo, an employment representative for United, claimed that she injured her right hand and wrist at work on August 1, 2001. As an employment representative, McAdoo organized hiring and recruiting and attended job fairs at various locations. On the morning of the injury, McAdoo exited her office with a heavy suitcase of job fair materials in the right hand and a shopping bag of materials in the left hand. As McAdoo descended the staircase, her heel caught on the stairs and she grabbed the rail with her left hand and felt a pop in her right wrist. McAdoo had pain but completed the job fair.
Thereafter, McAdoo continued working with pain and swelling in the right wrist and thumb that would come and go. McAdoo soaked and wrapped her right wrist and thumb as needed.
In the last week of August, McAdoo went on vacation in New York. After McAdoo returned, she went to Kaiser for treatment that began on September 1, 2001. The Kaiser records note right hand pain and swelling for more than two weeks, and that there was no injury or trauma. Kaiser provided medication and a right wrist splint.
When McAdoo retur
Page 1 2 3 4 5 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|