Ravinderjit Singh was employed as a physician with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) at North Kern State Prison in Delano, California, when she claimed to have suffered a January 8, 2013, industrial injury to her psyche following a fire marshal order to close examination room doors while examining inmates.
Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) John M. Stalberg, M.D., issued five medical reports regarding Dr. Sing. Following a workers’ compensation hearing a WCJ found, that the injury did not cause permanent disability and that based on Dr. Stalberg’s reporting, Singh “failed to meet the burden of showing entitlement to any period of temporary total disability.
Singh petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration, contending primarily that she was entitled to temporary disability. The WCAB issued its own decision finding Dr. Stalberg’s medical reporting lacking and that Singh “failed to follow-up with Dr. Stalberg and provide the requisite information for him to determine the period she was temporarily totally disabled.” The WCAB accordingly agreed with the WCJ and denied reconsideration.
Singh petitioned the court of appeal for a writ of review, and presented her case for entitlement to temporary disability payments. Singh notes that Dr. Stalberg opined she could return to work inside the prison with the reasonable accommodation of either leaving the examination room open or having a chaperone during examinations, but that the prison refused to accommodate her work restriction.
The WCAB filed a letter brief with the court of appeal stating that it “would admit error in this case and request that the Opinion and Order Denying Petition for Reconsideration issued on March 6, 2017, be annulled and that this matter be returned to the Board for further proceedings.”
The WCAB explains that while it focused its analysis on whether Singh proved temporary disability, she correctly pointed out in her petition for writ of review that “where an employer fails to provide modified work to an injured employee, temporary partial disability is deemed total. (Huston v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 856, 868.)” The WCAB explained that the record appeared incomplete, that it may have improperly analyzed Singh’s claim of temporary total disability, and expressed its desire to return the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
In response to this court’s inquiry as to whether this court should grant peremptory relief in light of the WCAB’s letter brief, the CDCR contends the matter should not be remanded because “[i]t is well established that an appellant cannot complain about an error that he or she created.” The CDCR asserts any lack of an adequate record is invited error of Singh’s own making by not further developing the record. (Mesecher v. County of San Diego (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1677, 1685.)
The court granted the WCAB request in the unpublished case of Sing v WCAB, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, “Given the WCAB’s admission it did not consider all available legal theories that might have entitled Singh to benefits, we conclude the WCAB’s decision fails to “state the evidence relied upon and specify in detail the reasons for the decision” as required under section 5908.5. The WCAB’s failure to set forth its reasoning in adequate detail constitutes a sufficient basis to annul the decision and remand for a statement of reasons.”