Valley Media And Legion Insurance Company Les Hall WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIALES HALL, Applicant,vs.VALLEY MEDIA and LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, DefendantsCase No. SAC 309589OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REMOVAL On July 19, 2002, the Appeals Board (Board) granted defendant’s petition for reconsideration of the Order Approving Compromise and Release (OAC&R) of May 1, 2002 in order to further consider the facts and law of this case, complete its deliberation and prepare an appropriate decision. We have completed our deliberation and the following is our Decision After Reconsideration. We will affirm the OAC&R but will strike the provision in the OAC&R awarding penalties and interest if payment is not made within 25 days of the OAC&R. Defendant, Legion Insurance, administered by Cunningham & Lindsay, contends that (1)the Workers’ Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) erred in not allowing defendant towithdraw from the compromise and release (C&R), arguing that subsequent to submission of the C&R, defendant was placed in rehabilitation,1 so that a mutual mistake of fact existed as to defendant’s ability to pay the lump sum settlement, and (2) the WCJ, who has awarded penalties and interest to applicant without giving defendant an opportunity to be heard, has denied defendant due process. Defendant alternatively seeks removal. We have received no answer from 1 On March 28, 2002, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued an order placing defendant, Legion Insurance Company, into rehabilitation. This order will be more fully discussed in our Opinion. , applicant, who is unrepresented, in response thereto. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the Report and Recommendation of the WCJ. Based on our review of the record, we agree with the WCJ that defendant has provided no evidence demonstrating why it cannot
