What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Last TTD payment April 16, 2014 → PD indemnity start date April 17, 2014
Favours neutral
Statutory trigger under § 4650(b)(1) for PD payments
From the decision · page 10The evidence in this case was somewhat less than clear as to the dates that the applicant worked for the subsequent employer SPCA. However, the parties stipulated that the last payment of temporary disability occurred on April 16, 2014.
Vocational expert Simon's analysis of combined orthopedic, internal, and psychiatric impairments established 100% PTD
Favours Applicant prevailed
Outcome-determinative on permanent total disability finding
From the decision · page 22permanent disability of this applicant. Therefore, it is found the applicant is 100% permanently disabled. As described below there is no basis for apportionment based on the applicant’s inability to access the labor market as a result of her current condition following the 2008 injury.
No evidence of synergistic effect between impairments required by Kite for additive rating
Favours Defendant prevailed
Precluded additive method; combined rating used instead
From the decision · page 20He indicated it remained his opinion that the applicant’s whole person impairment should be added per the Kite decision. There was no explanation of the synergistic effect between the various orthopedic injuries, internal injuries and psychological impairment/disability.
Vocational expert found no pre-existing apportionment factors affecting labor-market access at time of 2008 injury
Favours Applicant prevailed
Outcome-determinative on zero apportionment finding
From the decision · page 23In reliance on the foregoing opinions of vocational rehabilitation expert that there were no factors of apportionment in existence at the time of the career ending injury in 2008, it is found that there is no basis for apportionment.