LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, Permissibly Self-Insured, JIMMY RAYFORD, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJIMMY RAYFORD, Applicant,vs.LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendant(s).Case Nos. ADJ3561857 (VNO 0554772)ADJ2827639 (VNO 0454845)ADJ2145376 (VNO 0254342)ADJ3779581 (VNO 0254343)ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in said report which we adopt and incorporate, we will deny reconsideration. In addition, we first note that petitioner drafted the compromise and release agreement. Moreover, the required information for a compromise and release, as set forth in Labor Code section 5003, includes the amount paid up to the date of settlement and the amount due thereafter. Furthermore, WCAB Rule 10874 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10874) requires an approved form for compromise and release agreements, and paragraph 7 of that form includes a specific entry line providing for deductions of permanent disability indemnity, including the amount and the period of payment./////////////// , For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that said Petition for Reconsideration be, and it hereby is, DENIED. WORKERS’COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD _______________________________ JOSEPH M. MILLERI CONCUR, _______________________________ GREGORY G. AGHAZARIAN_______________________________ FRANK M. BRASSDATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIADEC
Jimmy Rayford, vs. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Permissibly Self-insured,
This case involves Jimmy Rayford and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, who are in dispute over a workers' compensation settlement. Rayford claims that he was entitled to a net settlement amount of $210,000, while the Authority claims that the settlement was for $250,000, with deductions for prior permanent disability advances. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board ultimately denied the Authority's Petition for Reconsideration, finding that Rayford was entitled to the $210,000, less any further permanent disability advances made after the date of the settlement.
- Filed On:
- Court: California, Van Nuys
- Case No. ADJ3561857
To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days
Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!
Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.