David Phillips vs. On Line Communications; State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves David Phillips, a truck driver who sustained an industrial injury to his shoulder, back, lower back, hips and legs on September 17, 2001. He settled his case by compromise and release approved by Order Approving Compromise and Release and Award dated May 12, 2003. On November 23, 2004, he filed a Petition to Reopen and Set Aside Prior C&R, alleging that his temporary disability payments were never adjusted properly. After trial on December 28, 2005, the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a Findings and Order on March 1, 2006, finding that applicant had not shown fraud committed by defendant and ordering that applicant take nothing further. The Court of Appeal annulled the Order Den

On Line Communications; State Compensation Insurance Fund David Phillips WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADAVID PHILLIPS, Applicant,vs.ON LINE COMMUNICATIONS; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendants.Case No. LAO 0827308OPINION AND DECISION AFTER REMITTITUR            On April 7. 2007 the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven filed its unpublished opinion in Phillips v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. 72 Cal.Comp.Cases 406. The Court annulled our Order Denying Reconsideration dated April 5, 2006 and remanded this matter for further proceedings. This is our decision after remittitur.1            Applicant, who is not represented by an attorney, while employed as a truck driver on September 17. 2001, sustained industrial injury to his shoulder, back, lower back, hips and legs. He settled his case by compromise and release approved by Order Approving Compromise and Release and Award dated May 12, 2003. On November 23, 2004 he filed a Petition to Reopen and Set Aside Prior C&R, alleging that his temporary disability payments were never adjusted properly. After trial on December 28, 2005, the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) issued a Findings and Order on March 1, 2006, finding that applicant had not shown fraud committed by defendant and ordering that applicant take nothing further. We denied applicant’s petition for reconsideration by Order dated April 5, 2006.            After granting applicant’s petition for writ of review, the Court of Appeal concluded that “the record shows ‘good cause’ to reopen under [Labor Code] section 5803, even though there is substantial evidence no fraud was involved” (72 Cal.Comp.Cases at 408). It held: “’Good cause’ 1 After remittitur, this matter had to be re-assigned to a new Appeals Board panelist since prior panelist. Commissioner Merle Rabine. was no longer sitting as a Commissioner. , For the foregoing reasons,IT IS ORDERED, as the decision after remittitur of the Worker

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.