In this case, the original trial judge had ruled that the old rating schedule applied, which was subsequently affirmed on reconsideration.
The appellate court reversed, holding that, since its recent decision in the Costco/Chavez case (to read that, CLICK HERE), none of the exceptions under Labor Code Section 4660(d) applied and, thus, the new rating schedule had to be used.
Relying on Chavez, the Court said it needn't decide the original issue of the case -- whether a particular report was truly a "comprehensive medical-legal report" -- because there is now NO distinction between a "comprehensive medical-legal report" or a treater's report.
Furthermore, the other argument for using the old rating schedule - when the "duty" to provide the end-of-TD notice arose - no longer was an issue either (in light of the latest interpretation that it's when TD ends, not when the duty to provide TD begins, which determines when the TD-notice exception applied).
As such, no exceptions for using the old schedule existed, so the new schedule had to be used.
But aside from this now-getting-very-old-very-quickly recitation of what the law is regarding "new" versus "old" rating schedule applicability, the case does offer a good review of the line of recent decisions deciding these various issues (such as Costco, Pendergrass I, II, etc. ).
This unpublished case is UCSF v. WCAB; Rand.
To read the full opinion,
PLEASE CLICK HERE. *
- Help for the Injured Worker
