Micheal Lewis vs. Rex Moore Electrical Contractors; Chartis Costa Mesa

(SAC 0360480) In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues regarding a worker's compensation claim. The worker had sustained an industrial injury to his back and psyche on May 9, 2003, and was found to be permanently and totally disabled. The defendant sought reconsideration of the decision, arguing that there was no factual or legal basis for the 4.7% assumed annual SAWW increase used to determine the attorney's fee. The Appeals Board rescinded the decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings, including an opportunity for the defendant to present rebuttal evidence on the 4.7% SAWW.

Rex Moore Electrical Contractors; Chartis Costa Mesa Micheal Lewis WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL LEWIS,Applicant,vs.REX MOORE ELECTRICALCONTRACTORS; CHARTIS COSTA MESA, Defndant(s).Case No. ADJ4118785 (SAC 0360480)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION On January 25, 2010, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) grantedreconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues. This is our decision after reconsideration. In the Findings and Award of November 9, 2009, the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ)found, in relevant part, that on May 9, 2003, applicant sustained industrial injury to his back and to his psyche, that applicant became permanent and stationary (P&S) on October 29, 2007, thatthe injury caused permanent and total disability, and that applicant’s attorney is entitled to areasonable fee of 14% of the indemnity awarded, pursuant to the November 2, 2009 commutationof the Disability Evaluation Unit (DEU). Pursuant to these findings, the WCJ awarded permanenttotal disability indemnity for life at applicant’s temporary disability indemnity rates withappropriate SAWW (State Average Weekly Wage) adjustments based on the permanent and stationary date, less defendant’s credit for indemnity paid, less EDD lien adjustments, and “lessattorney’s fee of $159,518.15 commuted and paid from the awarded benefits pursuant to the Method #2 on the November commutation by the DEU.”  Defendant sought reconsideration of the WCJ’s decision, contending that there is no factual or legal basis for the 4.7% assumed annual SAWW increase used to determine the attorney’s fee, , that defendant has standing to contest the award of attorney’s fees because defendant’s liability for attorney’s fees is substantially increased as a result of the use of the assumed increase in the SAWW, that the award of attorney’s fees should not be based on the SAWW adjustments because the adjustments are not a result of the care of skill exerci

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.