Home/Case Law/Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.
Regular DecisionReconsideration

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

Filed: Oct 01, 2010
San Francisco
ADJ2110739 (MON 0313927)

CompFox AI Summary

This case returns to the trial level for a comprehensive re-analysis of applicant's permanent disability rating, specifically focusing on the Diminished Future Earning Capacity (DFEC) adjustment factor. The Board rescinded the prior award because the judge's decision did not fully adhere to the Ogilvie en banc decisions, which mandate a specific four-step analysis for rebutting the DFEC. The judge must now conduct a complete Ogilvie analysis, potentially developing the record further, to determine if the applicant's demonstrated earning loss and other relevant factors, including Montana factors, justify an individualized DFEC adjustment over the scheduled rating. The applicant bears the burden of proving that her evidence substantially overcomes the prima facie validity of the scheduled DFEC.

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. is a workers' compensation case decided in San Francisco. 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 San Francisco.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

This case returns to the trial level for a comprehensive re-analysis of applicant's permanent disability rating, specifically focusing on the Diminished Future Earning Capacity (DFEC) adjustment factor. The Board rescinded the prior award because the judge's decision did not fully adhere to the Ogilvie en banc decisions, which mandate a specific four-step analysis for rebutting the DFEC. The judge must now conduct a complete Ogilvie analysis, potentially developing the record further, to determine if the applicant's demonstrated earning loss and other relevant factors, including Montana factors, justify an individualized DFEC adjustment over the scheduled rating. The applicant bears the burden of proving that her evidence substantially overcomes the prima facie validity of the scheduled DFEC.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. workers compensation case in San Francisco. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. case law summary from San Francisco. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. Case Analysis

Rosalind Eskridge (Vallery) vs. TARGET STORES, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. is a legal case related to workers' compensation in San Francisco. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.