CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that included a phrase about the applicant being held harmless, which was not in the original settlement agreement. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service of the OACR. While affirming the settlement amount, the Board amended the OACR to strike the "applicant is to be held harmless" language, as the WCJ could not unilaterally rewrite the parties' agreed-upon terms.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) that included a phrase about the applicant being held harmless, which was not in the original settlement agreement. The Appeals Board found the petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service of the OACR. While affirming the settlement amount, the Board amended the OACR to strike the "applicant is to be held harmless" language, as the WCJ could not unilaterally rewrite the parties' agreed-upon terms.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.