CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as untimely because it was improperly filed with a district office instead of directly with the Board, and even if timely, would have been denied on the merits. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for disqualification of the judge, finding no evidence of bias, as any misstatement about the number of cases was likely due to the judge's specific assignment. Finally, the applicant was put on notice regarding potential sanctions for future intemperate language and the possibility of being declared a vexatious litigant for repeatedly filing meritless disqualification petitions.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as untimely because it was improperly filed with a district office instead of directly with the Board, and even if timely, would have been denied on the merits. The Board also denied the applicant's petition for disqualification of the judge, finding no evidence of bias, as any misstatement about the number of cases was likely due to the judge's specific assignment. Finally, the applicant was put on notice regarding potential sanctions for future intemperate language and the possibility of being declared a vexatious litigant for repeatedly filing meritless disqualification petitions.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.