CompFox AI Summary
This case involves an applicant who sustained a back injury, resulting in a 34% permanent disability rating without apportionment. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the administrative law judge erred by not applying the diminished future earning capacity (DFEC) factor as per Ogilvie. The majority of the Appeals Board denied the reconsideration, adopting the judge's report. However, one Commissioner dissented, believing the applicant failed to meet their burden of proof under Ogilvie due to insufficient and unreliable evidence regarding post-injury earnings and earning capacity, and inconsistent testimony regarding limitations.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves an applicant who sustained a back injury, resulting in a 34% permanent disability rating without apportionment. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the administrative law judge erred by not applying the diminished future earning capacity (DFEC) factor as per Ogilvie. The majority of the Appeals Board denied the reconsideration, adopting the judge's report. However, one Commissioner dissented, believing the applicant failed to meet their burden of proof under Ogilvie due to insufficient and unreliable evidence regarding post-injury earnings and earning capacity, and inconsistent testimony regarding limitations.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.