MIGUEL DELGADO vs. IFCO SYSTEMS NORTH AMERICA, INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

ADJ4177729 (VNO 0532739) In this case, Miguel Delgado filed a petition for reconsideration of a Joint Findings and Award (F&A) issued by the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) on January 25, 2011. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) granted reconsideration of the WCJ's F&A and removed the matter to the Board on its own motion. The Board then ordered a hearing to take testimony and mark for identification any documentary evidence offered on the issues of whether: (a) applicant's attorney received a copy of the F&A from any source at or before the May 2, 2011 Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC); (b) applicant's attorney

IFCO SYSTEMS NORTH AMERICA, INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA MIGUEL DELGADO WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMIGUEL DELGADO, Applicant,vs.IFCO SYSTEMS NORTH AMERICA, INC.,TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTYCOMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ4629373 (VNO 0532737)  ADJ4177729 (VNO 0532739)DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONAND REMOVAL, AND ORDERS IMPOSING SANCTIONS            On June 28, 2011, applicant filed a verified petition seeking reconsideration of the Joint Findings and Award (F&A) issued by the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) on January 25, 2011. Defendant filed a verified answer to the petition. The verified allegations of applicant’s petition and defendant’s answer were contradictory. If applicant’s allegations were accepted, then his petition might have been timely. If defendant’s allegations were accepted, then his petition was untimely. In light of the contradictory allegations of applicant’s petition and defendant’s answer, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board) took the following actions in a decision issued August 29, 2011:            (1) we granted reconsideration of the WCJ’s F&A of January 25, 2011;            (2) we granted removal of this matter to the Board on our own motion;            (3) we ordered that a hearing shall be conducted by Judge Treadwell or any other WCJ assignedby the Presiding Judge to take testimony and mark for identification any documentary evidence offeredon the issues of whether: (a) applicant’s attorney received a copy of the F&A from any source at orbefore the May 2, 2011 Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC); (b) applicant’s attorney engaged inany ex parte communication with Judge Brown at the time of the May 2, 2011 MSC; and (c) applicant’sattorney gave Judge Brown any misinformation at the time of the May 2, 2011 MSC;            (4) we ordered Ronald J. Nolan (applicant’s attorney) and Eugene Bradford (defense counsel) toappear and testify at the hearing; ,           

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.