Barbara Bourland vs. Southern California Edison, Permissibly Self-insured

This case involves Barbara Bourland, who was injured while working for Southern California Edison. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues. The WCJ found that Bourland sustained industrial injury to her bilateral upper extremities and psyche during the period March 22, 2000 to March 22, 2001, that defendant unreasonably failed to pay permanent disability in the amount of $1,875.05, that applicant is entitled to a ten percent (10%) penalty on the unreasonably delayed permanent disability, in the amount of $187.51, and that applicant's attorney is entitled to a fee of $28.13. The Appeals Board affirmed the Findings and Award of November 7, 2012, noting that

Southern California Edison, Permissibly Self-Insured Barbara Bourland WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABARBARA BOURLAND, Applicant,vs.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendant.Case No. ADJ868368 (SDO 0280348)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            On February 1, 2013, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues. This is our Decision After Reconsideration.            In the Findings and Award of November 7, 2012, the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found that applicant sustained industrial injury to her bilateral upper extremities and psyche during the period March 22, 2000 to March 22, 2001, that defendant unreasonably failed to pay permanent disability in the amount of $1,875.05, that applicant is entitled to a ten percent (10%) penalty on the unreasonably delayed permanent disability, in the amount of $187.51, and that applicant’s attorney is entitled to a fee of $28.13.            Defendant filed a petition for reconsideration of the WCJ’s decision. Defendant contended that the WCJ erred in relying on a stipulation concerning credit for permanent disability made in the Stipulated Award of March 12, 2012, rather than earlier stipulations on permanent disability made by the parties at the Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC). Defendant further contends that the WCJ erred in assessing a penalty because defendant acted reasonably in not paying the permanent disability called into question by the credit.            The Appeals Board did not receive an answer from applicant.            We have considered the allegations of defendant’s petition for reconsideration, as well as the WCJ’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, , and for the reasons stated in said Report, which we adopt and incorporate, we will affirm the Findings and Award of November 7, 2012.            In addition, we note that it was defendant w

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.