CompFox AI Summary
This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order denies reconsideration of a petition related to Subsequent Injuries Fund (SIF) benefits. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, relying on the precedent set in Hernandez v. Commercial Building Maintenance, which requires a permanently partially disabled employee to demonstrate additional disability from a single subsequent injury to qualify for SIF benefits. Multiple subsequent injuries cannot be combined to meet this statutory threshold, and legislative changes have not altered this interpretation.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order denies reconsideration of a petition related to Subsequent Injuries Fund (SIF) benefits. The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, relying on the precedent set in Hernandez v. Commercial Building Maintenance, which requires a permanently partially disabled employee to demonstrate additional disability from a single subsequent injury to qualify for SIF benefits. Multiple subsequent injuries cannot be combined to meet this statutory threshold, and legislative changes have not altered this interpretation.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.