FARRIS V. CITY OF LOUISVILLE
WORKERS COMP: Reopening on increase in disability
PUBLISHED: VACATING AND REMANDING; BUCKINGHAM
DATE RENDERED: 11/17/2006
The Board erred as a matter of law when it concluded that the claimant was required to support her motion to reopen with evidence of an increased impairment rating. The Board erroneously found that “impairment” as used in KRS 342.125(1)(d) is synonymous with “permanent impairment rating” as defined in KRS 342.0011(35). An increase in disability, such as an increase from permanent partial disability to permanent total disability, is sufficient for additional benefits even though the claimant’s impairment rating did not change from the original award.