 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Ingalls's Case2/17/2005
nions, the resolution of those conflicts is for the administrative judge. See Amon's Case, 315 Mass. 210, 215 (1943); Fitzgibbons's Case, 374 Mass. 633, 636 (1978).
5. The employee argues that the administrative judge erred in accepting Mr. Cheney's testimony that the employer was willing to modify the employee's work responsibilities to accommodate the limitations caused by the employee's injury . We perceive no error because based on the evidence and the opinions of Dr. Leader-Cramer and Dr. Hoerner, the employee was able to return to his regular job with no modifications. See section 3, supra. We therefore do not address the issue of whether Mr. Cheney's testimony was sufficient to meet the requirements of G. L. 152, ยง 35D(3).
Decision of reviewing board affirmed.
|