Bowman v. Jack's Auto Sales

I concur with the result reached by the majority. I write separately, however, because I believe the decision of the board can be affirmed without addressing the issue of impairment to the plaintiffs whole person.1 The facts of this case do not require that we address the question of a permanent impairment to the whole person.

The following additional facts are necessary to understand the procedural history of this case. In April, 1993, the plaintiff sought additional workers’ compensation benefits on the theory that either (1) he was totally disabled or (2) that he had suffered additional…