Lillian Robinson Estate vs. Department of Corrections Case

This case involves the Department of Corrections (Legally Uninsured) adjusted by the State Compensation Insurance Fund, David Robinson (deceased), and Lillian Robinson (deceased). The Estate of Lillian Robinson is seeking reconsideration of the August 2, 2010 Conclusions of Law, wherein the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge found that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board does not have jurisdiction to make findings regarding the Applicant's entitlement to a PERS death allowance and that the Defendant may reduce the industrial death benefit by the amount of the PERS death allowance. The Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in failing to decide the two issues submitted to him, and the WCJ exceeded his authority when he found that the Defendant is entitled to a credit

Department Of Corrections (Legally Uninsured) Adjusted By State Compensation Insurance Fund David Robinson (Deceased) Lillian Robinson (Deceased) Estate Of Lillian Robinson WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADAVID ROBINSON (Deceased) LILLIAN ROBINSON (Deceased) estate of LILLIAN ROBINSON, Applicant(s.)vs.DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (Legally Uninsured) adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ2747713 (SAC 0354168)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of the August 2. 2010 “Conclusions of Law.” wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board docs not have jurisdiction to make findings regarding applicant’s entitlement to a PERS death allowance and that defendant may reduce the industrial death benefit by the amount of the PERS death allowance.            Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in failing to decide the two issues submitted to him. which were the amount of the PERS special death benefit and whether defendant is only entitled to credit for the tax savings related to the special benefit. Applicant also contends that the WCJ erred in deciding issues that were not submitted by the parties and that the WCJ exceeded his authority when he found that defendant is entitled to a credit for the total PERS special death benefit. Finally, applicant contends that the WCJ’s conclusions of law violate the Fair Employment and Housing Act.            The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that reconsideration be dismissed as untimely, or. in the alternative, denied. We have received an answer from defendant. Thereafter, applicant requested leave to file a response to , that Report. (Cal. Code. Regs., lit. 8. § 10848.) Applicant’s request to file a response to the Repon is granted, and the response filed by applicant ha

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.