physician: The physician found the-
applicant permanent and stationary.
The physician stated the applicant
required no further medical .treatment
or evaluation.
sought to get treated by another
physician. Applicant's attorney
apparently did not object to the primary
treating physician's report or attempt to
comply with Labor Code sections 4061
or 4062. The new physician found the
applicant permanent and stationary and
that the applicant's industrial injury
aggravated the applicant's Tourette's
syndrome. This doctor concluded this
would result in the applicant receiving
lifetime medical care for the Tourette's
syndrome.
orthopedist. The employer then
.obtained a qualified medical
examination in neurology to address the
Tourette's allegation.
(WCJ) found the second physician to .
be the primary treating physician that
carried the presumption "of correctness
pursuant to Labor Code section 4062.9.
was not certified for publication
may have added a new wrinkle to
the Tenet/C.mtinela Medical Center v.
WCAB{Rushing)(200Q) 80 Cal. App.
4th. 1.04.1 case. As you recall in
that case when the applicant was
considered permanent and
stationary and mere was no need for
continuing treatment the applicant
could not change primary treating
physicians.
the Tenet case'but also People v. King
(1993) 5-Cal.4fh 59 and Lundgren v.
Deukmejian, (1988) 45 Cal 3d 727.
.9785, subdivision (b). They seemed to
indicate that when the physician
discharges the applicant the applicant
cannot designate a new treating
physician before the physician dispute
is resolved They specifically state that
"...after treatment is concluded, the
right to choose a new treating physician
is limited. Read in the light of the
statutory and regulatory scheme as a
whole, section 4600 does not permit an
employee to select anew treating
physician each time he or she is
discharged from treatment and
disagrees with' the prognosis: unless
and until it is determined that there is a
further need for continuing treatment,-
anew primary treating physician may
not be selected"
the applicant being permanent and
stationary may have been alleviated by
this case.
Editor: HARVEY BROWN
Address 350 West 5th St. #105
Phone: 318 831-0872
Inc. V WCAB
(Antico)
These cases deal with Labor Code
sections 4600, 4601,4602,' and
Adrninistrative Director regulation
9785.
In this case the applicant sustained
injury to his head, neck, and back,
in the course of employment
Click here for printable version