Margaret Marti Foxworthy, vs. State Of California, Department Of Parks And Recreation, Legally Uninsured; State Compensation Insurance Fund/state Contract Services, Adjusting Agency,

is a case in which the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, was found to be legally uninsured. The State Compensation Insurance Fund/State Contract Services, Adjusting Agency, was the defendant. The applicant, Margaret Marti Foxworthy, sought reconsideration of the December 5, 2016 Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration, which amended the August 29, 2016 Findings and Award to find that the applicant's injury caused permanent disability of 67%, based upon the Combined Values Chart (CVC). The applicant argued that the CVC should not be applied in this case, as she had successfully rebutted its application with substantial medical evidence. The defendant argued that the CVC should be applied, and the board ultimately denied the applicant's

State Of California, Department Of Parks And Recreation, Legally Uninsured; State Compensation Insurance Fund/State Contract Services, Adjusting Agency, Margaret Marti Foxworthy, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARGARET MARTI FOXWORTHY,Applicant,vs.STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, Legally Uninsured; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES, Adjusting Agency,Defendants.Case No. ADJ8205957(Salinas District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of our December 5, 2016 Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration (ODAR), wherein we amended the August 29, 2016 Findings and Award to find that applicant’s injury caused permanent disability of 67%, based upon the Combined Values Chart (CVC), as set forth in the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (2005 PDRS).            Applicant contends that we erred in applying the CVC, arguing that she successfully rebutted its application in this case by substantial medical evidence. It is applicant’s position that her psychiatric, internal and orthopedic impairments from this industrial injury do not overlap and the permanent disability attributable to each distinct body part/system should be added together instead to produce overall permanent disability of 92%.            Defendant has filed an Answer to applicant’s Petition, urging us to affirm our decision.            We have again reviewed the record in this matter and have given due consideration to the allegations set forth in applicant’s Petition and defendant’s Answer thereto. Based on our review of the record; for the reasons stated in our December 5, 2016 ODAR, which we adopt and incorporate herein; as well as for the reasons set forth in the following discussion, we will deny applicant’s Petition./// , DISCUSSION            At the outset, we observe applicant’s concession that application of the CVC is presumptively correct and substanti

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.