Gwen Colleran, vs. City Of Los Angeles, Permissibly Self-insured,

(VNO 0460581)In this case, the City of Los Angeles was self-insured and the applicant, Gwen Colleran, was seeking vocational rehabilitation services from the date of her demand. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration and reversed the decision, finding that the applicant was not entitled to vocational rehabilitation services from the date of demand because her right to vocational rehabilitation benefits and services did not become vested prior to January 1, 2009, when Labor Code section 139.5 was repealed.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, permissibly self-insured, GWEN COLLERAN, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGWEN COLLERAN, Applicant,vs.CITY OF LOS ANGELES,permissibly self-insured, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ4402731 (VNO 0460581)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Order filed in this case on August 10, 2009 wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found the December 29, 2008 Determination of the Rehabilitation Unit (Determination) to be a final enforceable order, and also found applicant entitled to vocational rehabilitation services from the date of her demand. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding the Determination to be an enforceable order and in awarding applicant vocational rehabilitation benefits and services because applicant’s entitlement to vocational rehabilitation benefits and services was not vested prior to January 1, 2009, the effective date of the repeal of Labor Code section 139.5. Under these circumstances, defendant argues, the repeal of Labor Code section 139.5 extinguished any entitlement that applicant might claim to vocational rehabilitation benefits and services and the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) lost jurisdiction to award benefits for non-vested vocational rehabilitation rights.            We have considered the petition for reconsideration, the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) filed by the WCJ, and the entire record presented in this case. An answer to the petition has not been filed. For the reasons discussed below, we will grant reconsideration and reverse the decision. , RELEVANT FACTS            Applicant, born May 21, 1955, while employed on April 28, 1999, as an electrical craft helper by defendant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of her employment to her right upper extremity.            An applicat

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.