"The purpose of a PPD award ... is to compensate a worker for the loss or impairment of a physical or mental function." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawai‘i 36, 42, 404 P.3d 302, 308 (2017). "A PPD award is payable to the worker even if the worker returns to work, and the amount of the award derives from the extent of a worker's impairment rather than [their] wage-earning capacity." Id. (citing HRS § 386-32(a) ).
"Appellate review of a LIRAB [(Board)] decision is governed by the provisions of the Hawai'i Administrative Procedure Act relating to judicial review of agency action." Ihara v. State of Hawai'i Dep't. of Land and Nat. Resources, 141 Hawai'i 36, 41, 404 P.3d 302, 307 (2017) (citing HRS § 91-14(g) (1993)) (additional citation omitted)
A PPD award "compensates the worker not for total loss of income but for partial loss of function, either physical function or mental function." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawaiʻi 36, 46, 404 P.3d 302, 312 (2017) (emphasis added). "[U]ltimately the director of the [LIRAB] . . . decides the final PPD rating."
The purpose of a permanent partial disability award "is to compensate a worker for the loss or impairment of a physical or mental function." Ihara v. State, Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawai'i 36, 42, 404 P.3d 302, 308 (2017). It is not based on wages lost.
That presumption is paramount, in part, because the workers’ compensation statute "provides an injured employee's exclusive remedy for an injury arising out of and in the course of employment." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawai‘i 36, 42, 404 P.3d 302, 308 (2017) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To rebut the presumption, the employer has the burden of going forward with the evidence, which is the burden of production, as well as the burden of persuasion; the burden of production means that the employer must initially introduce substantial evidence that, if true, could rebut the presumption that the injury is work-related.
H. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 418-70, in 1970 House Journal, at 976. "Thus, the legislature intended that total disability benefits should compensate a worker for wages lost when he or she is unable to find regular employment of any kind due to a work-related injury[.]" Ihara v. State, DLNR, 141 Hawai'i 36, 42, 404 P.3d 302, 308 (2017). "Where a work injury causes total disability not determined to be permanent in character, the employer, for the duration of the disability . . . . shall pay temporary total disability benefits[.]"
A PPD rating determined by the Director may differ from a physician's recommendation because it is "ultimately the director . . . or the [LIRAB], and not the physician, that decides the final PPD rating." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawai'i 36, 43, 404 P.3d 302, 309 (2017) (citation omitted). On September 15, 2017, SCF appealed the case to LIRAB on the issue of apportionment with Employer Target/Insurer Sedgwick.
"Appellate review of a LIRAB decision is governed by the provisions of the Hawai'i Administrative Procedure Act relating to judicial review of agency action." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land &Nat. Res., 141 Hawai'i 36, 41, 404 P.3d 302, 307 (2017) (citations omitted). The Act provides, in relevant part:
"Appellate review of a LIRAB decision is governed by the provisions of the Hawai'i Administrative Procedure Act relating to judicial review of agency action." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land &Nat. Res., 141 Hawai'i 36, 41, 404 P.3d 302, 307 (2017) (citations omitted). The Act provides, in relevant part:
"Appellate courts review statutory interpretation de novo." Ihara v. State Dep't of Land & Nat. Res., 141 Hawai'i 36, 41, 404 P.3d 302, 307 (2017) (citing Van Ness v. State, Dep't of Educ., 131 Hawai'i 545, 558, 319 P.3d 464, 477 (2014), as corrected (Feb. 4, 2014)). "When construing a statute, our foremost obligation is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature, which is to be obtained primarily from the language contained in the statute itself."