Case details

Applicant claimed work injury caused need for ongoing care

SUMMARY

$2000000

Amount

Settlement

Result type

Not present

Ruling
KEYWORDS
brain, brain injury, cognition, head, headaches, hearing, loss of, mental, psychological, sensory, speech, tinnitus, traumatic brain injury
FACTS
On June 10, 2019, applicant Raul Rico, a farm worker in his 60s, was in the course and scope of his work when a falling branch struck his head, resulting in a brief loss of consciousness. Rico claimed to his head and a shoulder. Rico filed a workers’ compensation claim against his employer, Brian Walsh Brush Clearance. He brought a claim against the respondent, which was insured by the State Compensation Insurance Fund, in an attempt to collect workers’ compensation benefits., Rico claimed he sustained a traumatic brain injury and a rotator cuff tear to his right shoulder. He also briefly lost consciousness. When he regained consciousness, he was transported to a Kaiser hospital, where a CT scan of the head revealed a subarachnoid bleed over the medial left frontal lobe. As a result, he was placed on Keppra for seizure protection and discharged to follow up with a Kaiser occupational clinic. Rico was also referred for post-acute brain injury treatment at a Centre for Neuro Skills facility, where he presented with complaints of bilateral shoulder pain, tinnitus, headaches, eye pain, and problems with memory and attention. The Centre for Neuro Skills was able to provide Rico multidisciplinary care, including physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy and counseling during his rehabilitation. Rico claimed that he is left with a neurocognitive disorder, posttraumatic headaches, bilateral hearing loss, frontal lobe executive dysfunction, and tinnitus. As a result, the applicant’s rehabilitation experts secured care for Rico, as well as advocated for a finding of 100 percent total disability. Rico sought recovery for his ongoing future medical care, which will allegedly include medication management, counseling and conservative care for his orthopedic . The respondent’s counsel initially disputed that Rico was disabled or that Rico would need any future medical care.
COURT
Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, CA

Recommended Experts

NEED HELP? TALK WITH AN EXPERT

Get a FREE consultation for your case