News and Insights

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

Diomedez Quinonez vs. Checkmate Staffing, Inc.; Buckeye Claims; J.c. Penney, Inc.; Aig Claim Services; Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund

Checkmate Staffing, Inc.; Buckeye Claims; J.C. Penney, Inc.; AIG Claim Services; Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund Diomedez Quinonez WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADIOMEDES QUINONEZ, Applicant,vs.CHECKMATE STAFFING, INC.; BUCKEYE CLAIMS; J.C. PENNEY, INC.; AIG CLAIM SERVICES; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ3045197 (LAO 0818234)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION            The Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEF) seeks reconsideration of the June 8, 2011 Finding of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), who found in full as follows: “The 07/29/04 Findings and Award against Checkmate Staffing were not invalidated by the automatic stay that issued when Checkmate filed its bankruptcy petition on 12/29/2003. Applicant was not listed as a creditor in Checkmate’s bankruptcy case. Checkmate did not obtain a discharge of Applicant’s claim”            The different WCJ who earlier issued the July 29, 2004 Findings and Award in this case found that applicant incurred industrial injury to her right major shoulder and neck on August 2, 2002, while employed by Checkmate Staffing, Inc. (Checkmate) as a box printing machine operator, causing a period of temporary disability, 60% permanent disability and a need for future medical treatment. A joint and several award to that effect issued against Checkmate and “Buckeye Claims,” which is now identified a Checkmate’s claims administrator and not a workers’ compensation insurer. No party sought reconsideration of the July 29, 2004 Findings and Award or appealed to the Court of Appeal from it.            UEF contends that the WCJ should have rescinded the July 29, 2004 Findings and Award because Checkmate filed bankruptcy on December 29, 2003, which caused an automatic stay to be in effect pursuant to title 11 of United States Code section 362(a) when the case was heard and the award issued. ,             An answer was receiv


Join our community and never miss an update. Stay connected with cutting-edge insights and valuable resources.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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