Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Costa: The 2005 Permanent-Disability Schedule Was Rebuttable, Not Invalid

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published May 18, 2026

Joey M. Costa v. Hardy Diagnostic addressed a broad challenge to the 2005 permanent-disability rating schedule and clarified how a party may contest a rating within a particular record.

The schedule carried a statutory presumption

The Board treated the scheduled percentage as prima facie evidence of the permanent-disability percentage, leaving room for competent rebuttal rather than declaring the schedule conclusive.

A systemic attack required proof

Criticism of the empirical foundation did not, without an adequate evidentiary and legal showing, establish that the administrative director had exceeded the authority delegated by the Legislature.

Case-specific rebuttal remained available

A party could present evidence directed to the accuracy of the scheduled rating in the worker’s own case instead of asking the Board to invalidate the entire schedule.

Reasonable rebuttal costs could be addressed

The opinion recognized that costs associated with obtaining evidence to rebut a scheduled rating may be recoverable when the governing statutes and the record support them.

Key takeaways

• Start with the scheduled rating and its component inputs.
• Identify the precise factual premise that the evidence is intended to rebut.
• Use competent medical, vocational, or other admissible evidence tied to the individual worker.
• Document why the rebuttal evidence and its cost were reasonably necessary.