JCC Denies Attendant Care for CRPS Claim After Second Opinion

In Merima Mujkic v. Costco Wholesale Corp/Liberty Mutual Insurance, Judge John P. Moneyham addressed a claim for attendant care after a January 30, 2024 workplace accident involving the claimant's right hand.

The claimant sought attendant care from January 15, 2026 forward based on recommendations from Dr. Stone, a second-opinion physician. The employer/carrier responded that Dr. Stone did not write orders or prescriptions, that authorized doctors did not support attendant care, and that a replacement authorized physician could decide what treatment was appropriate.

The JCC found Dr. Stone's role comparable to an IME physician because she supplied medical evidence rather than treating the claimant. Applying section 440.13(2)(b)1. and Tri City Electric Contractors Inc. v. Gondek, the order concluded Dr. Stone's questionnaire and report were not a written prescription for attendant care performed under her direction and control.

The JCC also found attendant care was not medically necessary, crediting Dr. Parmar and Dr. Patel that significant attendant care could be detrimental to CRPS recovery by limiting function, reactivation, and use of the affected extremity. The attendant-care claim, costs, and attorney fees were denied, while the employer/carrier's claim for taxable costs was granted. OJCC Case No. 24-009690JPM.

Source: Compensation Order