Amandeo v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding a medical expert’s testimony must be reviewed “as a whole[,] and [we] may not base our analysis on a few words taken out of context”
• stating that “while summaries of testimony alone would be insufficient to satisfy the reasoned decision requirement, where a WCJ summarizes testimony and also objectively explains his credibility determinations, the decision will satisfy the requirement.”
• a WCJ may rely upon her own observations of the claimant’s demeanor in assessing credibility
• in determining whether medical evidence is unequivocal and therefore competent to support a factual determination, we review the testimony as a whole and do not base our analysis on a few words taken out of context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).