AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Worker filed an appeal concerning the calculation of loss of use benefits, specifically challenging the credit given to the Employer/Insurer for overpayment of benefits. The Court of Appeals had previously made a math error in calculating the Worker's entitlement, which both parties acknowledged. The Worker sought to have the erroneous calculation upheld under the doctrine of law of the case, despite its inaccuracy.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Administration, Gregory D. Griego, Workers’ Compensation Judge: The Workers' Compensation Judge's decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, despite a math error in the calculation of benefits.

Parties' Submissions

• Worker-Appellant: Argued that the Court of Appeals should apply the doctrine of law of the case to maintain the math error made in the previous memorandum opinion, which erroneously doubled the benefits calculation.
• Employer/Insurer-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the doctrine of law of the case should be applied to perpetuate a math error made by the Court in a previous memorandum opinion.

Disposition

• The Court declined to apply the doctrine of law of the case to perpetuate the math error and affirmed the Workers’ Compensation Judge's final order.

Reasons

• Per Cynthia A. Fry, J. (Jonathan B. Sutin, J., and Linda M. Vanzi, J., concurring): The Court recognized the math error in its previous memorandum opinion but decided against applying the doctrine of law of the case to perpetuate this error. The Court distinguished between legal issues and factual errors, noting that the doctrine applies to the former and not the latter. The Court also emphasized that correcting the error would prevent an unjust doubling of the benefits owed to the Worker. The Court refused to revisit legal issues previously decided in the first appeal, maintaining those determinations as the law of the case.