Instructions: In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Input: a partial wage loss benefit. See N.J.S.A. 34:15-12a and b (seventy percent of weekly wages, subject to a statutory cap). Each benefit is payable for weeks the injured worker is unable to work because of the injury. This similarity further sways us towards the conclusion that the weekly benefit in either case is intended as a partial wage loss replacement for disability resulting from the work related injury or illness. Even if it can be said that total permanent disability compensation benefits contain some unspecified and unquantified component of indemnity for physical impairment, the overriding form, amount and purpose of the benefit is partial replacement of wages during the period of disability. See also Young v. W. Elec. Co., Inc., 96 N.J. 220, 232, 475 A.2d 544 (1984) (<HOLDING>). "The workers' compensation system is remedial
Holding statements: (A) holding that workers compensation statutes do not prohibit claimant from receiving permanent partial disability benefits from prior accident concurrently with temporary total disability benefits from subsequent injury (B) holding that disability pension benefits could be offset against both temporary and total permanent disability compensation benefits (C) holding that claimant may simultaneously receive unemployment benefits and workers compensation for temporary partial disability where statute only precludes receipt of workers compensation for temporary total or permanent total disability if claimant is receiving unemployment benefits (D) holding that the workers compensation offset includes total social security disability benefits received by claimant and his dependents (E) holding that a totally disabled claimant whose preexisting osteoarthritis was temporarily aggravated by her employment was entitled to temporary total disability benefits but not permanent total disability benefits because there was no causal connection between the temporary aggravation and the permanent disability
Output:
holding that workers compensation statutes do not prohibit claimant from receiving permanent partial disability benefits from prior accident concurrently with temporary total disability benefits from subsequent injury