AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Worker-Appellant was denied permanent partial disability benefits by the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) for his psychological impairment, which was categorized as non-ratable under the American Medical Association Guide. Additionally, the WCJ did not combine the Worker's shoulder impairment with his total impairment rating. The Worker's psychological condition and shoulder injury were argued to be a direct and proximate result of an accident related to his employment.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Administration, Gregory D. Griego, Workers’ Compensation Judge

Parties' Submissions

• Worker-Appellant: Argued that the WCJ erred by not assigning an impairment rating for the psychological condition and by not considering the Worker's shoulder condition in determining the overall impairment. The Worker relied on precedent to argue that all impairments contributing to disability should be included in the award, even if not caused by the job accident.
• Employer/Insurer-Appellees: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the WCJ erred by not assigning an impairment rating for the Worker's psychological condition.
• Whether the WCJ erred by not combining the Worker's shoulder impairment with his total impairment rating in determining his permanent partial disability.

Disposition

• The compensation order was affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Court reversed the WCJ's decision to the extent it failed to provide an impairment rating for the psychological condition but affirmed the decision regarding the non-consideration of the Worker's shoulder condition in the overall impairment rating.

Reasons

• Per Wechsler J., with Bustamante J. and Fry J. concurring, the Court proposed to reverse the WCJ's denial of permanent partial disability benefits for the Worker's psychological impairment, holding that the WCJ erred by not assigning an impairment rating based on medical testimony. However, regarding the Worker's shoulder impairment, the Court concluded that no error occurred as the Worker did not demonstrate a causal connection between the shoulder injury and the psychological pain disorder or the trigeminal nerve injury, which were determined to be a direct and proximate result of the accident. The Court relied on precedent to require a causal connection between the accidental injury and the resulting disability for compensation, finding no such connection in this case.