CompFox AI Summary
This case involved applicant Salvador Sainz seeking reconsideration of a 57% permanent disability award for a 2012 back and psyche injury. Sainz argued he was totally disabled due to his vocational ineligibility for rehabilitation, but the Board denied his petition. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that Sainz's vocational expert's opinion was not persuasive and conflicted with the medical evidence and defendant's vocational expert. Therefore, the original award of 57% permanent disability was affirmed.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involved applicant Salvador Sainz seeking reconsideration of a 57% permanent disability award for a 2012 back and psyche injury. Sainz argued he was totally disabled due to his vocational ineligibility for rehabilitation, but the Board denied his petition. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that Sainz's vocational expert's opinion was not persuasive and conflicted with the medical evidence and defendant's vocational expert. Therefore, the original award of 57% permanent disability was affirmed.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.