GA & FC Wagman, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Aucker)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the employer’s expert never acknowledged that the claimant suffered from the specific work injury identified in the NCP, the expert could not have found that the claimant fully recovered from that injury
• holding employer’s medical expert’s testimony was incompetent where expert testified that claimant was fully recovered from sprain and degenerative disc disease, but not from exacerbation of pseudoarthrosis, which was accepted work injury
• in a termination petition proceeding, an employer cannot satisfy its burden to demonstrate that a claimant has fully recovered with testimony from a medical expert that does not acknowledge the work-injury
• physician’s testimony insufficient to support termination where he testified that employee was fully recovered from work injury but did not acknowledge the injury listed in the NCP as the injury from which employee recovered

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).