From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cefalu v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.
Dec 17, 2013
842 N.W.2d 537 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)

Opinion

No. 2013AP745.

2013-12-17

Joseph M. CEFALU, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION, Avenue, Inc. and Wisconsin Uninsured Employer Fund c/o ASU Risk Group, Defendants–Respondents.

The insert also noted that known adverse reactions include “peptic ulcer with possible perforation and hemorrhage.” The ALJ excluded the insert, stating that it “involve[s] hearsay and issues of authenticity,” and because “the copy right [ sic ] on the face of [the insert] is 2010 versus ... 2002 at which time [Cefalu] allegedly received and took [Medrol].” There was no evidence as to how many doses of Medrol Cefalu took in 2002, nor was there evidence that the dosage to which the insert relates was the same dosage Cefalu consumed. The ALJ did, however, accept documents from several medical experts, including Dr. Armstrong, Dr. John Brusky, and Dr. Kristen Reynolds, all of whom submitted reports on behalf of Cefalu; and Drs. Randal Wojciehoski and Jerome Hanson, who submitted documents for Avenue, Inc.'s insurance carrier. Ultimately, Dr. Wojciehoski opined that Cefalu did not sustain a permanent partial disability as a result of his work-related injury.



Summaries of

Cefalu v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.
Dec 17, 2013
842 N.W.2d 537 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)
Case details for

Cefalu v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n

Case Details

Full title:Joseph M. CEFALU, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW…

Court:Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.

Date published: Dec 17, 2013

Citations

842 N.W.2d 537 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)
352 Wis. 2d 574
2014 WI App. 16