Donald Silva vs. Scolari Tile Co.; And Zenith Insurance Co.

Donald Silva was injured while employed as a tile setter on January 20, 2005. He filed for benefits from the Employment Development Department (EDD) and received them from January 27, 2005 to June 29, 2005. Donald Silva filed an Application for Adjudication of Claim with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) and the defendant accepted the claim and began payments of temporary disability indemnity (TDI) on June 16, 2005. The defendant terminated TDI to applicant based on section 4656, subdivision (c)(1) on January 29, 2007. The WCJ found that since applicant received SDI benefits from January 27, 2005, and defendant reimbursed EDD for these benefits, defendant was entitled to claim the commencement

Scolari Tile Co.; And Zenith Insurance Co. Donald Silva WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADONALD SILVA, Applicant,vs.SCOLARI TILE CO.; And ZENITH INSURANCE CO., Defendants.Case No. STK 195998OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONApplicant seeks reconsideration of the June 1, 2007 Findings. Award and Order* 1 wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant, while employed as a tile setter, on January 20, 2005, sustained industrial injury to his right femur, left clavicle, right patella, right shoulder, jaw, neck and back. The WCJ awarded temporary disability indemnity (TDI) from January 27, 2005 to January 27, 2007, less reimbursement to the Employment Development Department (EDD) for 20 weeks of benefits paid (January 27, 2005 to June 15, 2005). In the Opinion on Decision, the WCJ reasoned that the 104 week limit starts on the date “when the applicant actually receives payments from the source other than the industrial carrier or employer.” (Opinion on Decision, p. 3, emphasis in original.)            Applicant contends the WCJ ened in finding that the start date for the 10“4 Week limit of TDI under Labor Code section 4656, subdivision (c)(1)2 began when he received State Disability Insurance (SDI) from EDD. Applicant contends the WCJ erred in determining that EDD benefits are the “functional equivalent” of workers’ compensation TDI. arguing that defendant should not be entitled to a credit against the 104 week cap for SDI which was paid by EDD. Applicant also contends that the time during which he received SDI benefits, where defendant later reimbursed 1 The June 1. 2007 Findings. Award and Order contained a typographical error reflecting service on June 1. 2006. The decision was re-served on June 12, 2007.1 Unless otherwise stated, all further statutory references are to the Labor Code. , EDD, should not be counted in the 104 weeks under section 4656, subdivision (c)(1

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.