| Date: | 09/30/2003 |
|---|---|
| Organization: | Department of Industrial Accidents |
| Docket Number: | DIA Board No. 006313-00 |
| Location: | Boston |
- Employee: John Hilane
- Employer: Adecco Employment Services
- Insurer: Insurance Co. of the State of PA
MAZE-ROTHSTEIN, J. The employee appeals from a decision awarding a closed period of G. L. c. 152, § 35, weekly partial incapacity workers’ compensation benefits and §§ 13 and 30 medical expenses. The employee makes three arguments on appeal. First, he contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to submit additional medical evidence based on the inadequacy of the § 11A report. We disagree. Next the employee makes a weight of the evidence and credibility argument relevant to his testimony at hearing. We remind him that since the 1991 amendments, § 11C does not allow us to weigh the evidence. And, we disagree with the employee on his credibility point as well. Finally, the employee asserts that the judge mischaracterized the opinion of the treating chiropractor admitted for the so-called "gap period," and relied on that mischaracterization in determining the issue of continuing medical disability. Because the subsidiary findings regarding duration of incapacity depart from the evidence, we recommit the matter to the judge for further consideration of this key piece of medical evidence and the general findings that flow therefrom. G. L. c. 152, § 11C.