Esposito v. Stamford — dissenting

Summary

The dissent would reverse the Compensation Review Board because the administrative law judge expressly found, on the evidentiary record, that the decedent's vision loss had become permanent and reached maximum medical improvement by June 9, 1998. It reasons that total-incapacity benefits and permanent-disability benefits compensate different losses, that a permanent partial-disability rating is unnecessary for a statutorily fixed total disability, and that the decedent's entitlement vested when the injury became permanent. The dissent would leave the surviving spouse's entitlement and any offset unresolved for initial consideration by the board. Justice Ecker, joined by Justices McDonald and Alexander, dissents and would reverse and remand.