Santa Barbara
apportionment case
appellate court
decision
decision from an
appellate court, on two
and filed a workers'
compensation claim. The parties
agreed to an Agreed Medical
Examiner (AME) who
determined that 70 % of the
applicant's problems were
industrial and 30 % were
nonindustrial.
employer. The applicant need
medical care for his injuries and
the employer required him to use
earned vacation time instead of
sick time for medical
appointments.
making him use vacation as
opposed to sick time.
Judge (WCJ) found no
discrimination and found on
amended award the need for
apportionment under SB 899.
The Workers' Compensation
Appeals Board (WCAB)
concurred.
that the employer did not
establish a "legitimate business
purpose for this discrimination."
may not discriminate against
active, industrially-injured
workers in the use of sick leave.
speculative. The AME indicated
his apportionment was not
precise and required some
intuition and medical judgement.
The court stated this does not
mean his conclusions are
speculative and therefore, the
apportionment, was substantial
evidence. The AME stated the
factual basis for his determination
were based on his medical
expertise.
Firm: Samuelsen, Gonzalez,
Valenzuela and Brown
Address: 18881 Von
Karman # 250 Irvine 92612
Phone: 949 252-1300
Click here for printable version