CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied applicant Charles Hines' petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision that applicant's vocational expert's report was insufficient to rebut the application of the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule. This was due to the expert's failure to adequately distinguish between industrial and non-industrial factors contributing to the applicant's diminished future earning capacity. Therefore, the applicant was awarded 46% permanent disability based on the scheduled rating.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied applicant Charles Hines' petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision that applicant's vocational expert's report was insufficient to rebut the application of the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule. This was due to the expert's failure to adequately distinguish between industrial and non-industrial factors contributing to the applicant's diminished future earning capacity. Therefore, the applicant was awarded 46% permanent disability based on the scheduled rating.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.