Home/Case Law/MYKEAL ANDREW WAGNER vs. WALMART and AVIZENT BENTONVILLE
Regular DecisionWorkers' Compensation

MYKEAL ANDREW WAGNER vs. WALMART and AVIZENT BENTONVILLE

Filed: Sep 23, 2009
San Francisco
ADJ3907382 (AHM0133851)

CompFox AI Summary

The applicant filed a second petition for reconsideration challenging a prior Appeals Board decision that had already dismissed a previous petition. The Appeals Board dismissed this subsequent petition because it was a successive filing. The Board established that after a petition for reconsideration is denied or dismissed, a party must seek a writ of review, not another reconsideration. Therefore, the applicant's petition was dismissed as procedurally improper.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

The applicant filed a second petition for reconsideration challenging a prior Appeals Board decision that had already dismissed a previous petition. The Appeals Board dismissed this subsequent petition because it was a successive filing. The Board established that after a petition for reconsideration is denied or dismissed, a party must seek a writ of review, not another reconsideration. Therefore, the applicant's petition was dismissed as procedurally improper.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

MYKEAL ANDREW WAGNER vs. WALMART and AVIZENT BENTONVILLE (2009) – San Francisco | CompFox