Read Full Decision Here
Excerpts
Claimant worked for Employer for 20 days during 1972 and alleges he was exposed to asbestos at that time. In addition, he has been exposed to asbestos at different jobs for the past 40 years. However, Employer was his last maritime employment. Claimant filed a claim for compensation on November 22, 2010, alleging date of injury as February 22, 2010, and describing the injury as “asbestosis with other possible complications.” (CX-1, p. 1). Employer argues that Claimant does not have asbestosis, and even if he does he is not owed compensation, because there is no economic injury; Employer avers Claimant has no work restrictions based on the condition.
Conclusion
Claimant has multiple medical problems in this case, all contributing to his no-work
status. Dr. Shamsnia found Claimant was totally disabled because of his neurological findings.
Dr. Kuebel was of the same opinion that Claimant should not be working due to his Binswanger
diagnosis, his neurological condition. He opined that Claimant could return to work as long as
he refrained from exposure to asbestos or dusty environments. Dr. Gomes was the only doctor
to suggest that Claimant should be taken out of work based on his pulmonary issues. But Dr.
Gomes had diagnosed asbestosis, contrary to the finding of the Court. Dr. Jones believed that
based on Claimant’s pulmonary condition he could return to his former job with no restrictions.
At this time, his pleural plaques are not found to be an economically disabling injury. I find that
based on the evidence, Claimant is not economically disabled from his pleural plaques at this
time.
No comments:
Post a Comment