CompFox AI Summary
This case involves an applicant whose nine percent permanent disability rating for a right knee injury is disputed. The applicant argues this rating is disproportionate and unfair, as it prevents him from returning to his former plumbing work and is contradicted by a vocational expert's assessment of a 36-53% loss of future earning capacity. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original decision, and returned the case for further proceedings. This is to allow the WCJ to consider the applicant's permanent disability in light of two en banc decisions, Almaraz and Ogilvie, which clarified the rebuttability of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves an applicant whose nine percent permanent disability rating for a right knee injury is disputed. The applicant argues this rating is disproportionate and unfair, as it prevents him from returning to his former plumbing work and is contradicted by a vocational expert's assessment of a 36-53% loss of future earning capacity. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original decision, and returned the case for further proceedings. This is to allow the WCJ to consider the applicant's permanent disability in light of two en banc decisions, Almaraz and Ogilvie, which clarified the rebuttability of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.