CompFox AI Summary
Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences:
The applicant, David Danley, who sustained a 100% permanent and total disability, sought to increase his permanent disability indemnity rate beyond the stipulated $410.00 weekly. He argued his recently completed Ph.D. demonstrated an increased earning capacity pursuant to Labor Code § 4453(c)(4), which should be considered despite lower actual earnings at the time of injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the applicant failed to provide specific, demonstrable evidence of a concrete job that would have yielded higher earnings. The Board concluded that potential future earnings based on education are too speculative unless supported by specific employment opportunities.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer, in four sentences:
The applicant, David Danley, who sustained a 100% permanent and total disability, sought to increase his permanent disability indemnity rate beyond the stipulated $410.00 weekly. He argued his recently completed Ph.D. demonstrated an increased earning capacity pursuant to Labor Code § 4453(c)(4), which should be considered despite lower actual earnings at the time of injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the applicant failed to provide specific, demonstrable evidence of a concrete job that would have yielded higher earnings. The Board concluded that potential future earnings based on education are too speculative unless supported by specific employment opportunities.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.