Court Opinion

ID: 9513591
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:38:10.506136+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:55.499112
License: Public Domain

on petition for rehearing.
[¶ 41] The Bureau filed a petition for rehearing, arguing the AMA Guides do not permit the conversion and combination of some of Shieks prior permanent impairments with his subsequent permanent impairment. The arguments raised by the Bureau in its petition for rehearing address issues concerning the process of applying the AMA Guides to Shiek’s permanent impairments in order to determine Shiek’s combined whole-body impairment rating. Such issues are to be determined by the Bureau on remand.
[¶ 42] In its petition for rehearing, the Bureau also pointed out a mathematical error in one of the prior orders of the Bureau awarding Shiek permanent impairment benefits. If the Bureau’s order is incorrect, the Bureau should correct its order on remand. The petition for rehearing is denied.
[¶ 43] GERALD W. VANDE WALLE, C.J., WILLIAM A. NEUMANN, J., concur.
[¶ 44] We would grant the petition for rehearing.
CAROL RONNING KAPSNER, DALE V. SANDSTROM, JJ., concur.