Trejo-Perez v. Arry's Roofing

I dissent, because in this case of first impression the majority opinion incorrectly *227denies a Spanish-speaking Claimant a medically necessary evaluation by a Spanish-speaking psychiatrist, a treatment which Claimant’s authorized treating neurologist specifically recommended that Claimant receive. No medical testimony supports the JCC’s view that the Spanish-speaking psychiatric evaluation is not medically necessary. In fact, as Claimant rightfully asserts, there is no contrary medical testimony at all on this point — the JCC simply rendered her own unqualified and unsubstantiated medical…