News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

Balerio Cruz vs. Rocky’s Masonry; Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company As Administered By Gallagher Bassett Services; California Insurance Guarantee Association And Its Servicing Representative Sedgwick Claims Management, For Reliance Insurance Company In Liquidation

Rocky’s Masonry; Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company as administered by Gallagher Bassett Services; California Insurance Guarantee Association and its servicing representative Sedgwick Claims Management, for Reliance Insurance Company in Liquidation Balerio Cruz WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABALERIO CRUZ, Applicant,vs.ROCKY’S MASONRY; ACE FIRE UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY asadministered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES; CALIFORNIA INSURANCEGUARANTEE ASSOCIATION and its servicing representative SEDGWICK CLAIMSMANAGEMENT, for Reliance Insurance Company in Liquidation, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ337486 (VNO 0425011)ADJ3042060 (VNO 0540026)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            Defendant California Insurance Guarantee Association by its third party administrator Sedgwick Claims Management for Reliance Insurance Company in Liquidation (CIGA) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) issued on March 20, 2013 by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). In that F&A, the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant Balerio Cruz did not sustain a cumulative trauma injury from August 21, 2000 to January 20, 2001. CIGA contends in pertinent part that the WCJ erred and applicant did sustain a cumulative trauma injury based on the opinions of the Agreed Medical Evaluator.            We received an answer from defendant Gallagher Bassett, on behalf of Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company. The parties also filed various other pleadings regarding the issue of whether applicant sustained a cumulative trauma injury.            We received a Report and Recommendation (Report) from the WCJ in response to the Petition for Reconsideration which recommends that CIGA’s Petition be denied.            We have reviewed the record and considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration, the answer, the pleadings by the parties, and the contents of the Report. Based on our review of the , record, for t

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Get exclusive access to in-debt interviews.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *