This case involves a dispute between Joey M. Costa, the applicant, and Hardy Diagnostic and State Compensation Insurance Fund, the defendant, over the reimbursement of costs for the testimony and report of a vocational rehabilitation expert. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration in order to further study the factual and legal issues and ultimately reversed the WCJ’s decision, allowing the costs of the expert’s testimony and report.
HARDY DIAGNOSTIC and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, JOEY M. COSTA, WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJOEY M. COSTA, Applicantvs.HARDY DIAGNOSTIC and STATECOMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ4640837 (GRO 0031810)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONThe Appeals Board granted reconsideration in this matter to further study the factual andlegal issues in order to give us a complete understanding of the record and to enable us to issue ajust and reasoned decision. The following is our Decision After Reconsideration. Previously, the Appeals Board had issued two en banc decisions in this case.1 In “Costa r’ (2006) 71 Cal. Comp. Cases 1797, the Appeals Board held that (1) the applicant had not met his burden of proving that the new permanent disability rating schedule (PDRS) under Labor Code section 46602 was invalid, and (2) as under former section 4660, current section 4660 allows the parties to present rebuttal evidence to a proposed
