158 A.3d 906
D.C.2017Background
- Kevatte A. Jones, a former Arlington County deputy sheriff, was working as a WMATA bus driver when she was injured in a September 25, 2007 crash that injured her head, left arm, and left knee.
- Jones had left law‑enforcement work after a 2006 knee injury, began bus driving, and after the WMATA crash attempted but could not return to policing because she could not meet physical standards (push‑ups, running, dragging).
- Treating physician Dr. Fechter reached maximum medical improvement in 2012 and assigned permanent partial impairment ratings (32% left upper, 25% left lower); WMATA’s examiner assigned lower ratings and attributed only part to the WMATA injury.
- At the administrative hearing Jones sought to introduce her prior vocational history (work as a deputy sheriff) to show diminished ability to compete in the labor market; the ALJ excluded detailed testimony about that prior job and based the schedule award on Jones’s capacity relative to the job she held when injured (bus driver).
- The Compensation Review Board (CRB) affirmed, holding that schedule awards are tied to the claimant’s employment at the time of injury and that an employer is not liable for inability to return to prior employment; Jones petitioned for judicial review, arguing the CRB wrongly excluded vocational history evidence.
- The Court remanded because the CRB’s explanation was insufficiently clear and directed the CRB to reconsider whether evidence of ability to perform prior employment is relevant under the WCA and controlling case law (including the Court’s contemporaneous decision in Dent).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a claimant may introduce evidence of prior vocational history (ability to perform pre‑injury, more physically demanding jobs) to support a scheduled permanent partial disability award under D.C. Code § 32‑1508(3) | Jones: Evidence of prior employment physical demands is relevant to measure proportionate loss of use and market competitiveness and thus relevant to a schedule award | CRB/WMATA: Schedule awards are tied to employment and wages at time of injury; employer not responsible for inability to return to prior employment; such prior‑job evidence is not relevant | Court: Remand — CRB’s rationale was insufficiently clear; CRB must reconsider and explain whether and how prior vocational history is relevant under WCA and Dent’s principles |
| Whether the CRB adequately explained its decision under the court’s standard of review | Jones: CRB erred as a matter of law by excluding evidence without clear statutory grounding | CRB: Relied on statutory formula and precedent to limit relevance to employment at injury time | Court: No — remand required for a clearer explanation applying applicable statutes and case law |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 41 A.3d 1219 (D.C. 2012) (describing scope of judicial review of CRB and deference to agency statutory interpretation)
- Nixon v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 954 A.2d 1016 (D.C. 2008) (discussing deference to CRB on statutory interpretation)
- Negussie v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 915 A.2d 391 (D.C. 2007) (describing use of AMA Guides and specific factors in assessing scheduled disability)
- Washington Post v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 675 A.2d 37 (D.C. 1996) (noting that an ALJ should consider a claimant's industrial history when measuring degree of disability)
- Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 683 A.2d 470 (D.C. 1996) (agency deference principles in workers’ compensation context)