CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits due to back injuries. The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior award, arguing the permanent disability rating was too low, as he believed he had successfully rebutted the rating based on the AMA Guides. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding that the applicant failed to provide substantial medical evidence to rebut the scheduled rating. The Board clarified that the burden of proof for rebuttal rests with the applicant and that a conclusory statement of loss of function is insufficient.
Bradley Lorenz vs. STOWASSER PONTIAC, INTERCARE ROSEVILLE is a workers' compensation case decided in . This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in .
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits due to back injuries. The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior award, arguing the permanent disability rating was too low, as he believed he had successfully rebutted the rating based on the AMA Guides. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding that the applicant failed to provide substantial medical evidence to rebut the scheduled rating. The Board clarified that the burden of proof for rebuttal rests with the applicant and that a conclusory statement of "loss of function" is insufficient.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.