Dwayne Rudd vs. Oakland Raiders And Ace/usa, Administered By Esis; Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Permissibly Self-insured, Administered By Nova Pro Risk Solutions

This case is about the Oakland Raiders and Tampa Bay Buccaneers seeking reconsideration of a Findings and Award issued by a workers' compensation administrative law judge. The judge found that the applicant's claim for industrial cumulative trauma injuries was not barred by the one year statute of limitations due to the defendants' failure to comply with the notice requirements under Labor Code section 5401. The defendants argued that the applicant had knowledge of his right to workers' compensation benefits and was not prejudiced by the failure of any employer to provide him notice of his rights. After review of the record, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and found that the applicant's claim was barred by the statute of limitations due to his knowledge of his rights to workers' compensation benefits and his

Oakland Raiders And Ace/USA, Administered by ESIS; Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by Nova Pro Risk Solutions Dwayne Rudd WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADWAYNE RUDD, Applicant, vs.OAKLAND RAIDERS AND ACE/USA, Administered by ESIS; TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by NOVA PRO RISK SOLUTIONS, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7109517 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Defendants, Oakland Raiders, by and through its insurer, ACE/USA, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers, permissibly self-insured, administered by Nova Pro Risk Solutions, seek reconsideration of the Findings and Award, issued February 14, 2011, in which a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found applicant’s January 28, 2010 claim for industrial cumulative trauma injuries to multiple parts of his body while employed as a professional football player by various teams over the period 1997 to August 30, 2004, was not barred by the one year statute of limitations. The WCJ held defendants were estopped to assert the defense of the statute of limitations due to its failure to comply with the notice requirements under Labor Code section 5401. The WCJ found applicant’s date of injury for his claimed cumulative trauma was the period ending January 4, 2007, concluding applicant obtained constructive knowledge that he sustained a work related injury when he signed a DWC-1 claim form. The WCJ further concluded that though applicant had previously filed two claims for this cumulative trauma injury, both of which had been dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution, defendant had not established that applicant had been provided the requisite knowledge of his rights prior to the , filing of the Application for Adjudication of Claim in January of 2010.            Defendant, Oakland Raiders, contends the WCJ’s erred in concluding applicant’s claim is not barred by the one year statute

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.