Binkley v Alston Power, Inc., 2009 ACO #212
In a split decision the Appellate Commission confirmed the magistrate’s findings of a work-related injury and also agreed that an attorney fee on medical was inappropriate. However, the Comission overturned the magistrate’s decision due to the disability analysis that was inconsistent with the Stokes decision. The Appellate Commission noted that they were not comfortable relying on the “common sense” approach to determining whether the plaintiff’s skill set provided him an opportunity to earn maximum wages. They go on to state that “if Mr. Binkley had presented competent vocational testimony or conducted a good faith job search, his award of benefits would likely withstand scrutiny. Because he failed to provide either, we believe his proofs are insufficient.” Key point: this case underscores the importance of obtaining vocational/Stokes evaluations.
