CompFox AI Summary
This case involved a workers' compensation claim for a knee injury. The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior award, arguing that the administrative law judge improperly apportioned 20% of his permanent disability to factors other than the industrial injury, alleging age discrimination. The Board affirmed the original decision, agreeing with the judge that the apportionment was based on objective degenerative changes in the applicant's knee, as opined by the agreed medical evaluator, and not solely on his age. Therefore, the apportionment was supported by substantial evidence and did not constitute unlawful age discrimination.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involved a workers' compensation claim for a knee injury. The applicant sought reconsideration of a prior award, arguing that the administrative law judge improperly apportioned 20% of his permanent disability to factors other than the industrial injury, alleging age discrimination. The Board affirmed the original decision, agreeing with the judge that the apportionment was based on objective degenerative changes in the applicant's knee, as opined by the agreed medical evaluator, and not solely on his age. Therefore, the apportionment was supported by substantial evidence and did not constitute unlawful age discrimination.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.