Jose Nierras, vs. Tek Systems/allegis Group, Permissibly Self-insured, Adjusted By Broadspire,

(OAK 0281403) This case involves Jose Nierras, an applicant, and TEK Systems/Allegis Group, a permissibly self-insured company adjusted by Broadspire. Nierras seeks reconsideration of the September 21, 2009 Findings, Award, and Order, wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the applicant demonstrated good cause to reopen his award and that the applicant sustained 51.25% permanent disability after apportionment as a result of his January 15, 2002 industrial injury to his back and left lower extremity. The WCJ also found that, subsequent to October 14, 2005, applicant was temporarily totally disabled during the period July 30, 2006 through

TEK SYSTEMS/ALLEGIS GROUP, permissibly self-insured, adjusted by BROADSPIRE, JOSE NIERRAS, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJOSE NIERRAS, Applicant,vs.TEK SYSTEMS/ALLEGIS GROUP, permissibly self-insured, adjusted by BROADSPIRE, Defendant.Case No. ADJ3634961 (OAK 0281403)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of the September 21, 2009 Findings, Award, and Order, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the applicant demonstrated good cause to reopen his award and that the applicant sustained 51.25% permanent disability after apportionment as a result of his January 15, 2002 industrial injury to his back and left lower extremity. The WCJ also found that, subsequent to October 14, 2005, applicant was temporarily totally disabled during the period July 30, 2006 through August 2, 2006 and was not temporarily disabled during any other period.            Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in finding 51.25% permanent disability, arguing that defendant did not meet its burden of proof on the issue of apportionment. Applicant also contends that the WCJ erred in failing to award additional temporary disability, arguing that the applicant began a period of temporary disability prior to January 15, 2007, and, therefore, additional temporary disability is not barred by the statute of limitations.            We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration, and we have reviewed the record in this matter. We received an answer from defendant. The WCJ prepared a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that the petition be , denied.            For the reasons discussed below, we will grant reconsideration, rescind the Findings, Award, and Order, and return this matter to the WCJ for further development of the record and a new decision.I.            As a preliminary matter, we note that t

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.