CompFox AI Summary
Both the applicant and the defendant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding the applicant 88% permanently disabled due to multiple industrial injuries. The applicant argued for 100% permanent disability, citing vocational expert testimony and preclusion from the open labor market under LeBoeuf. The defendant contested the rating, disputing findings of vertigo, sleep disorder, and cognitive disability. The Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's report and affirming the 88% disability rating. A dissenting commissioner would have granted the applicant's petition for total permanent disability, emphasizing medical and vocational evidence of unemployability.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Both the applicant and the defendant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding the applicant 88% permanently disabled due to multiple industrial injuries. The applicant argued for 100% permanent disability, citing vocational expert testimony and preclusion from the open labor market under LeBoeuf. The defendant contested the rating, disputing findings of vertigo, sleep disorder, and cognitive disability. The Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's report and affirming the 88% disability rating. A dissenting commissioner would have granted the applicant's petition for total permanent disability, emphasizing medical and vocational evidence of unemployability.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.