CompFox AI Summary
This case involves an applicant denied vocational rehabilitation benefits by the WCJ. The applicant argued the Rehabilitation Unit's (RU) delay constituted nonfeasance and deliberate indifference, entitling him to benefits despite the repeal of the relevant statute. The Board denied reconsideration, finding no evidence to support the applicant's allegations of RU misconduct. The Board also highlighted the applicant's own significant delays in pursuing his claim, which prejudiced his ability to secure benefits before the law changed.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves an applicant denied vocational rehabilitation benefits by the WCJ. The applicant argued the Rehabilitation Unit's (RU) delay constituted nonfeasance and deliberate indifference, entitling him to benefits despite the repeal of the relevant statute. The Board denied reconsideration, finding no evidence to support the applicant's allegations of RU misconduct. The Board also highlighted the applicant's own significant delays in pursuing his claim, which prejudiced his ability to secure benefits before the law changed.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.