SKY SHADOW vs. PHARMAVITE LLC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves Sky Shadow, an applicant, and Pharmavite LLC and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, defendants. Sky Shadow filed a Petition to Reopen/Request to Set Aside Order Approving Compromise and Release, alleging that the Compromise and Release was the product of fraud and coercion. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, finding that the Petition to Reopen was untimely and that Sky Shadow had not met her burden of proof to establish fraud or coercion.

PHARMAVITE LLC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY SKY SHADOW WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIASKY SHADOW, Applicant,vs.PHARMAVITE LLC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants.Case No. ADJ755705 (VNO 0550346)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            Applicant, in propria persona, seeks reconsideration of the August 8, 2012 Findings and Order re: Petition to Reopen (F&O), wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant’s Petition to Reopen/Request to Set Aside Order Approving Compromise and Release (Petition to Reopen) was untimely and that applicant had not sustained her burden of proof to establish fraud or coercion. Applicant had alleged that, while employed as an administrative assistant and consumer affairs representative from March 1997 through October 1, 2007, she sustained industrial injury to her psyche and high blood pressure. The parties settled applicant’s claim via a Compromise and Release approved on September 28, 2010.            Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in not setting aside the Compromise and Release.            We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration and defendant Liberty Mutual’s Answer, and we have reviewed the record in this matter. The WCJ prepared a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report), recommending that the Petition be denied.            For the reasons expressed by the WCJ in her Report, which we adopt and incorporate, and for the reasons discussed below, we will deny applicant’s Petition for Reconsideration.////// ,             The parties’ Compromise and Release was approved on September 28, 2010. On March 18, 20111, applicant filed her Petition to Reopen, alleging that the Compromise and Release was the product of fraud and coercion.            The WCJ held a trial on applicant’s Petition to Reopen on May 10, 2012 and June 28, 2012. Applicant testified that she had asked defense counsel’s assistant

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.