News and Insights

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

Judith Volkerts vs. Jon B. Artz; Ciga By Its Servicing Facility, Broadspire Claims Services For California Comp. Insurance, In Liquidation; Seabright Insurance Company

Jon B. Artz; CIGA by its servicing facility, Broadspire Claims Services for California Comp. Insurance, in liquidation; Seabright Insurance Company Judith Volkerts WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJUDITH VOLKERTS, Applicant,vs.JON B. ARTZ; CIGA by its servicing facility, BROADSPIRE CLAIMS SERVICES for CALIFORNIA COMP. INSURANCE, in liquidation; SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ2725399 (VNO 0431180) ADJ832058 (VNO 0431183)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING RECONSIDERATION            We have considered the allegations of the petition for reconsideration and the contents of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (WCJ’s) Report and Recommendation. However, based on our review of the record, it appears the petition is untimely and must be dismissed.            Labor Code section 5903 allows twenty (20) days after service of a final order, decision, or award to file a petition for reconsideration, and the time for filing may be extended five (5) days for mailing (Code of Civ. Proc., § 1013; WCAB Rule 10507) if the final order, decision or award is served by mail. A petition for reconsideration is deemed filed on the day it was actually received at the WCAB office and not on the date it was deposited in the mail. (Valle v. Workers’ Comp, Appeals Bd. (1973) 38 Cal.Comp.Cases 468 (writ denied); Oliver v. Structural Services and Zenith National Ins. Co. (1978) 43 Cal.Comp.Cases 596; (Appeals Board Panel Opinion); County of Lake v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Helbush) (1984) 49 Cal.Comp.Cases 627 (writ denied). The time limit for filing a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional so that the Board lacks the power to grant an untimely petition. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171; Scott v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979, 46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008.) ,             The Findings and Award in these cases was per

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 *