News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

Daniel Lee vs. Ncrc, Inc.

NCRC, Inc. Daniel Lee WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADANIEL LEE, Applicant,vs.NCRC, INC., Defendant.Case No. ADJ4182817 (OAK 0334111)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            We previously granted applicant’s petition for reconsideration of the November 10, 2010 Findings and Order of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) who found that the WCAB “does not have jurisdiction” to determine whether applicant’s claim for benefits pursuant to Labor Code section 132a “was excluded from assets in the bankruptcy court as a part of the workers’ compensation claim, where it has been stipulated that applicant did report the workers’ compensation claim and it was exempted under that bankruptcy proceeding.”1 Based upon that finding, the WCJ deferred ruling on the merits of the section 132a claim until after a ruling by the bankruptcy court that the claim was excluded from applicant’s bankruptcy estate such that applicant had standing to pursue it before the WCAB.            It was earlier found by a different WCJ on September 2, 2009, that applicant incurred industrial injury to his head, bilateral knees, right wrist and memory loss on December 29, 2006, when he was involved in a motorcycle accident while acting as a service technician in the course of his employment by defendant NCRC, Inc. (NCRC), causing a period of temporary total disability. Applicant’s claim for other workers’ compensation benefits was later settled by compromise and release as approved by the WCJ on June 21, 2010, with a lump sum payment of $47,000.            Applicant contends that the WCAB has jurisdiction to determine whether an injured worker has 1            Further statutory references are to the Labor Code. Commissioner Moresi was appointed by Chairman Miller to take Commissioner Cuneo’s place on the panel following his retirement from the Appeals Board. , standing to pursue a section 132a claim and that the WCJ should have determined in this case

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Get exclusive access to in-debt interviews.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *