CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns an applicant who sustained a lumbar spine injury and appealed a permanent disability rating. The applicant challenged the validity of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS) and argued a vocational consultant's testimony rebutted the rating. The Board affirmed the original decision, finding the applicant failed to prove the PDRS was invalid and that the consultant's testimony did not rebut it. However, the Board reversed the denial of reimbursement for the consultant's expert testimony, finding him qualified as an expert in diminished future earning capacity.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns an applicant who sustained a lumbar spine injury and appealed a permanent disability rating. The applicant challenged the validity of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS) and argued a vocational consultant's testimony rebutted the rating. The Board affirmed the original decision, finding the applicant failed to prove the PDRS was invalid and that the consultant's testimony did not rebut it. However, the Board reversed the denial of reimbursement for the consultant's expert testimony, finding him qualified as an expert in diminished future earning capacity.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.