Guadalupe Munoz vs. Pronto Market State Compensation Insurance Fund

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by the lien claimant because it was unverified and not served on the defendant at its correct address. The Board also noted that the petition did not come to their attention until after the expiration of the statutory time period, but they found that the running of the 60-day period was tolled for a reasonable period of time after the Board's actual notice of the petition.

PRONTO MARKET STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND GUADALUPE MUNOZ WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGUADALUPE MUNOZ, Applicant,vs.PRONTO MARKET; STATECOMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendants.Case No. ADJ2336207 (POM 0284113)ORDER DISMISSINGPETITION FORRECONSIDERATION            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in said Report, which we adopt and incorporate, we will dismiss the petition, because the petition is unverified and was not served on defendant at its correct address. Further, the petitioning lien claimant fails to state grounds for reconsideration.            In issuing this disposition, we further note that the Appeals Board has 60 days within which to act on a petition for reconsideration. (Labor Code section 5909.) However, lien claimant’s petition did not come to the attention of the Appeals Board until after the expiration of the statutory time period. Consistent with fundamental principles of due process and common sensibilities, we found, under the particular circumstances of this case, that the running of the 60-day statutory period for reviewing and acting upon the petition for reconsideration was tolled for a reasonable period of time after the Board’s actual notice of J ,en claimant’s petition. (Shipley v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1104, 1107-1108 [57 Cal.Comp.Cases 493); State Farm Fire and Casualty v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals25 Bd. (Felts) (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 193 46 Cal.Comp.Casers 622, 624).)/ / // / / ,             For the foregoing reasons,            IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration is DISMISSED.WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD    _____________________________________________RONNIE G. CAPLANE        I CONCUR,        ____________________________

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.