CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board reconsidered a Joint Findings and Award that found Applicant had a 62% disability due to two industrial injuries, rebutting the Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS). The Board found the vocational expert's attempt to rebut the PDRS by combining work restrictions from separate injuries was improper. Additionally, the Agreed Medical Examiner's apportionment opinion lacked sufficient reasoning to be considered substantial evidence. Consequently, the Board amended the award, rating each injury individually based on the AME's whole person impairment ratings and applying the PDRS accordingly.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board reconsidered a Joint Findings and Award that found Applicant had a 62% disability due to two industrial injuries, rebutting the Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS). The Board found the vocational expert's attempt to rebut the PDRS by combining work restrictions from separate injuries was improper. Additionally, the Agreed Medical Examiner's apportionment opinion lacked sufficient reasoning to be considered substantial evidence. Consequently, the Board amended the award, rating each injury individually based on the AME's whole person impairment ratings and applying the PDRS accordingly.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.