| July, 2007 |
|
|
|
348 West Hospitality Lane, Suite 202
San Bernardino, CA 92408
909.890.1800
909.890.1801
3131 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 380
San Diego, CA 92108
619.283.7011
619.283.7684
2024 North Broadway, Suite 315
Santa Ana, CA 92706
714.541.6611
714.541.6703
|
|
|

|
Print
Version |
|
“Workers' Compensation
Appeals Board Defers All Decisions Under
Old and New Rating Schedules"
by
Scott M. Tilley, Esq. |
|
|
Joseph Miller, Chairman of the Appeals Board, has issued a
memorandum stating that the Board will defer to the
California Supreme Court all further decisions regarding the
calculation of permanent disability due under the new rating
schedule when there is apportionment to an old injury under
the prior rating schedule.
This position arises out of concern regarding a series of
conflicting opinions in several Appellate Courts on the
issue of apportionment. As most are aware, the Fifth
Appellate District issued an opinion in E & J Gallo
Winery v. WCAB (Dykes) which states that when
calculating permanent disability after apportionment one is
to subtract the dollar amount for the permanent disability
resulting from the prior injury (using the PD rate in effect
at the time) from the dollar amount of the total permanent
disability (using the present PD rates). This is commonly
known as “formula C”, as so noted by the Court in Fuentes
v. WCAB.
The Fifth Appellate Court’s decision in Dykes was
upheld in Nabors v. WCAB, a case issuing from the
First Appellate District, Division Two. The Court in
Nabors ruled that old dollars should be deducted from
new dollars but limited its holding to a situation where the
old injury and new injury occurred with the same
self-insured employer.
To further complicate the issue, the First Appellate
District, Division Three (not Division Two as in Nabors)
issued an opinion in Brodie V. WCAB which agrees in
principle with the holdings in both Dykes and
Nabors but adds its own twist. The Brodie court
held that when calculating permanent disability with
apportionment between injuries falling under the old rating
schedule and the new rating schedule, the current dollar
value of the prior award is subtracted from the current
dollar value of the current permanent disability (this is in
contrast to the Dykes court which used old money
value subtracted from new money value).
In direct conflict with the opinions in Nabors, Dykes and
Brodie is the decision issued by the Third Appellate
District court in Welcher v. WCAB. The Welcher
Court held that the permanent disability percentage for the
prior award should be deducted from the current permanent
disability percentage (commonly known as “formula A” as
noted in the Court in Fuentes).
These conflicting and inconsistent opinions issuing from the
various Appeals Courts has caused the Board to put a halt on
further decisions issuing from them until the Supreme Court
or Legislature addresses the issue. Many in the community
feel that this will do nothing but cause further problems by
further clogging an already clogged system, encouraging
Judges to issue opinions even more diverse than the ones
already issued or cause cases to continue in an active
status long after their natural life.
One glimmer of hope on this issue is the fact that cases are
already being submitted to the California Supreme Court.
Perhaps clarity is closer than it appears.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is
intended for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as legal advice. You should seek competent legal
counsel for advice on any legal matter.
|
Print
Version
Contact Parker & Irwin
|
|