1A medical panel's finding of fact that is plainly contradicted by contemporaneous documentary evidence before it, on an issue central to a referred question, constitutes a constructive failure to perform its statutory function amounting to jurisdictional error, particularly where the panel's reasons disclose no intellectual engagement with the contradictory material.
2Merely recording relevant material in reasons without demonstrating active engagement with it on a key issue does not satisfy the panel's statutory obligation; a generic statement that the panel considered all materials 'goes nowhere' to cure the deficiency.
3A factual error by a medical panel satisfies the materiality threshold where the outcome of the referred question could have been different had the error not been made, and the issue was squarely raised by the parties' submissions and the referral questions themselves.
