CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns an applicant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for psychiatric injury and other conditions. The applicant was found to have an $82%$ permanent disability rating, with $80%$ attributed to psychiatric issues after apportionment. The key dispute is the $20%$ apportionment of psychiatric disability to non-industrial factors, which the applicant argues is improper for a finding of permanent total disability based on vocational unfeasibility. The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's report which cited precedent (Hertz Corp. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Aguilar)) confirming that vocational unfeasibility is subject to apportionment.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns an applicant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for psychiatric injury and other conditions. The applicant was found to have an $82%$ permanent disability rating, with $80%$ attributed to psychiatric issues after apportionment. The key dispute is the $20%$ apportionment of psychiatric disability to non-industrial factors, which the applicant argues is improper for a finding of permanent total disability based on vocational unfeasibility. The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's report which cited precedent (Hertz Corp. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Aguilar)) confirming that vocational unfeasibility is subject to apportionment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.