Alberto Guzman, vs. Richwell Steel Company; State Compensation Insurance Fund,

In this case, Alberto Guzman filed a Petition for Reconsideration against Richwell Steel Company and the State Compensation Insurance Fund. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found that the petition was untimely and dismissed it. The decision was issued by mail on August 21, 2017 and the petition was due by September 15, 2017. The petition was filed on September 19, 2017, which was too late, and the Board had no authority to consider or act upon it.

Richwell Steel Company; State Compensation Insurance Fund, Alberto Guzman, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAALBERTO GUZMAN,Applicant,vs.RICHWELL STEEL COMPANY; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND,Defendants.Case No. ADJ7724238(Van Nuys District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, the petition is untimely and must be dismissed.            There are 25 days allowed within which to file a petition for reconsideration from a “final” decision that has been served by mail upon an address in California. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10507(a)(1).) This time limit is extended to the next business day if the last day for filing falls on a weekend or holiday. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10508.) To be timely, however, a petition for reconsideration must be filed with (i.e., received by) the WCAB within the time allowed; proof that the petition was mailed (posted) within that period is insufficient. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, §§ 10845(a), 10392(a).)            This time limit is jurisdictional and, therefore, the Appeals Board has no authority to consider or act upon an untimely petition for reconsideration. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1076 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 656]; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1182; Scott v Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979, 984 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008, 1011]; US. Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Hinojoza) (1962) 201 Cal.App.2d 545, 549 [27 Cal.Comp.Cases 73, 75-76].)/// ,             In this case, the WCJ’s decision issued by mail on August 21, 2017. Based on the authority cited above, defendant had until Friday, September 15, 2017 to request reconsideration in a timely m

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.