Guillermina Mejia vs. Atlas Resources Inc Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co

In this case, Guillermina Mejia was seeking workers' compensation benefits from Atlas Resources Inc. and Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. Garfield Health Center filed a lien for medical services provided to Mejia. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the Petition for Reconsideration of lien claimant, Garfield Health Center, to allow time to review the case. The WCJ issued a Notice of Intention to Pay Lien Claimant, giving notice that defendant would be ordered to pay lien claimant's lien in the amount of $20,605.23 unless defendant provided good cause to the contrary within twenty days. However, the WCJ later rescinded the Notice of Intention and issued a December 11, 2013 Order

ATLAS RESOURCES INC LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE CO GUILLERMINA MEJIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGUILLERMINA MEJIA, Applicant,vs.ATLAS RESOURCES, INC.; LIBERTYMUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE CO., Defendants.Case No. ADJ1315954 (MON 0356740)(Marina del Rey District Office)OPINION AND DECISION AFTERRECONSIDERATION, AND ORDERSDISMISSING PETITIONS FORRECONSIDERATION, GRANTINGREMOVAL, AND DECISION AFTERREMOVAL            The Appeals Board previously granted the Petition for Reconsideration of lien claimant, Garfield Health Center, to allow time to review the case. This is our Decision after Reconsideration.            Garfield Health Center seeks reconsideration of the December 11, 2013 Order Rescinding Decision, Vacating Submission and Setting Further Proceedings wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) rescinded the November 8, 2013 Order to Pay Lien Claim. In the rescinded Order to Pay Lien Claim the WCJ had allowed the lien of Garfield Health Center in the amount of $20,605.23. Acting under WCAB Rule 10859 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10859), the WCJ rescinded the Order to Pay Lien Claim based on defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration of that Order. In its Petition, defendant contended that the November 8, 2013 Order to Pay Lien Claim was issued in error because it was issued subsequent to a Notice of Intention that had been rescinded by the WCJ and was not in effect. Defendant further contended that it was denied due process with regard to both the Notice of intention and the November 8, 2013 Order.            Lien claimant now contends that the WCJ lacked the authority to rescind the November 8, 2013 Order pursuant to WCAB Rule 10859 because defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration of that Order was untimely. Lien claimant further contends that the WCJ deprived lien claimant of due process when he issued the December 11, 2013 Order; defendant failed to timely object to the Notice of Intention which preceded the November 8,

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.