RECONSIDERATION AND NOTICE OF 8 INTENTION TO ISSUE SANCTIONS Defendant. (LABOR CODE 5813) 9

Transcription

1 1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 Case No. ADJ AUDELIA MORA GONZALEZ, (Los Angeles District Office) Applicant, 6 OPINION AND ORDER vs. GRANTING PETITION FOR 7 RECONSIDERATION; DECISION AFTER KAY'S CLEANERS, RECONSIDERATION AND NOTICE OF 8 INTENTION TO ISSUE SANCTIONS Defendant. (LABOR CODE 5813) 9 11 Lien claimant, Priority Care Medical Transportation, seeks reconsideration of the Order 12 Dismissing Lien Claim for Failure to Pay Lien Fee Prior to Lien Conference wherein the workers' 13 compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) noted that a lien conference had been held on February 6, at 8:30 a.m. but that petitioning lien claimant had failed to file a proof of payment of the activation 15 fee and failed to submit proof of payment of the activation fee at the lien conference. It was further noted 16 that the WCJ checked for payment of the lien activation fee in EAMS at 1:54 p.m. on the date of the 17 hearing and there was no showing that the lien activation fee had been paid. Therefore, the WCJ 18 dismissed petitioner's lien claim with prejudice pursuant to Labor Code section (a) (4). In the 19 Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report), the WCJ noted that petitioner was 20 present at the lien conference at the time of the hearing. The WCJ also noted: 1) that applicant's claim 21 had been resolved via Compromise and Release approved on June 18, 2012; 2) that defendant had filed a 22 Declaration of Readiness requesting a lien conference on November 16, 2012 for which a lien conference 23 occurred on February 6, 2013; and 3) that petitioner was represented at that conference by Ms. Ana 24 Montes-Gluck. 25 Lien claimant's Petition for Reconsideration consists, in its entirety, of the following: 26 "Lien Claimants, Priority Care Transportation through its lien representative, Innovative Medical Management, hereby submits its 27 Petition for Reconsideration. The Order Dismissing the lien of Priority

2 1 Care Transportation is not supported by procedural facts. 2 STATEMENT OF FACTS Lien claimant received notice of the lien conference scheduled for 3 February 6, :30 Los Angeles before the Honorable Judge Sandra Rosenfeld. Defendants have yet served any closing documents, medical 4 reports etc.. ARGUEMENTS Nsicl 5 Lien claimant contends WCJ erred in issuing Order Dismissing lien of 6 Priority Care Transportation based on lien claimant procedurally haven't been properly served with closing documents, medical reports and evidence to support a position one way or another, lien claimant contends Priority Care Transportation was not the moving party, and simply wasn't 8 prepared to move forward without the above mentioned documentation, furthermore defendants resolved said lien informally without aid of 9 WCAB, at this point lien claimant files this brief Petition of Reconsideration and seeks relief [sic]. CONCLUSION 11 Lien claimant in no waives [sic] its rights to adjudicate the lien of Priority Care Transportation after all procedurally [sic] documents have been 12 served on lien claimant and if the defendants fail to execute payment, a Declaration of Readiness would be filed." Based upon our review of the record, and for the reasons set forth herein, we will grant 15 reconsideration, affirm the WCJ's Order dismissing the lien claim of petitioner and issue a Notice of 16 Intention to Impose Sanctions against Innovative Medical Management and Priority Care Medical 17 Transportation, jointly and severally, in the amount up to $1, for filing a Petition for 18 Reconsideration without following the Rules pertaining to the form of a petition for reconsideration. 19 Also, lien claimant has filed a frivolous petition which fails to address the WCJ's basis for dismissal and 20 notes that the lien has been "resolved". We also give Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions against 21 Louis Heard in an amount up to $ for filing a petition for reconsideration without identifying 22 himself as a hearing representative despite prior warnings regarding this violation of the Rules. 23 Likewise, Louis Heard failed to identify himself in the caption of the petition. 24 Petitioner has not provided any specific examples of alleged error by the WCJ and has failed to 25 cite to the record in any way whatsoever. As such, sanctions are intended to admonish petitioner for 26 failing to cite to the actual record in this matter, wasting valuable judicial resources and filing a skeletal 27 petition. Sanctions are also intended to admonish petitioner for filing a petition for reconsideration GONZALEZ, Audelia Mora 2

3 I which lacks identification of the author drafting the petition as an attorney or hearing representative. In 2 aggravation of these failures to follow procedural rules regarding the filing of petitions, we note that 3 Innovative Medical Management and Louis Heard have previously been warned about their failure to 4 follow the Rules governing the filing of petitions for reconsideration. 5 We note that Labor Code section 5813 permits the award of sanctions, attorney's fees and costs 6 against a party who engages in "bad-faith actions or tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause 7 delay." Section 5813, subdivision (b), provides: "The determination of sanctions shall be made after 8 written application by the party seeking sanctions or upon the Appeals Board's own motion." California 9 Code of Regulations, title 8, section 561, subdivision (b) (2) authorizes sanctions for filing a petition unless there is reasonable justification for filing the document. Petitioner admits that the lien claim at 11 issue has been "resolved." Moreover, lien claimant has entirely failed to address the Order which 12 dismissed the lien for failure to file the activation fee. 13 California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 561, subdivision (b) (4) authorizes sanctions for 14 failure to follow the Appeals Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure. In the petition presently before 15 us, petitioner has filed a petition without properly identifying the individual appearing for the lien 16 claimant (see California Code of Regulations, title 8, 550 (d) and California Code of Regulations, 17 title 8, 232). The petition also contains formatting errors contrary to California Code of Regulations, 18 title 8, section 232 (11). 19 We note that sanctions may be imposed on the Appeals Board's own motion (Lab. Code 5813). 20 The Appeals Board has upheld a $2, sanction awarded against a party for filing pleadings which 21 were not justified. (Blake v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Gonzalez) (2008) 73 Cal.Comp.Cases (writ den.).) 23 Accordingly, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 561, subdivisions (b) 24 (2) and (b) (4), we hereby give Innovative Medical Management and lien claimant, Priority Care Medical 25 Transportation, notice of our intention to impose sanctions against them, jointly and severally, in a total 26 amount up to $1, We also hereby give lien claimant's hearing representative, Louis Heard, notice 27 of our intention to impose sanctions against him an amount up to $250.00, unless within 15 days, plus an GONZALEZ, Audelia Mora 3

4 1 additional 5 days for mailing (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 507(a)(1)), they file responses setting forth 2 good cause as to why we should not impose the intended sanctions of $1, and $250.00, 3 respectively, for the reasons set forth above. 4 Absent a timely objection and demonstration of good cause to the contrary, within 15 days after 5 service of this decision, sanctions in an amount up to $1, against Innovative Medical Management 6 and lien claimant, Priority Care Medical Transportation, jointly and severally, and in an amount up to 7 $ against lien claimant's hearing representative, Louis Heard, will be assessed, payable to the 8 Workers Compensation Appeals Board and sent to Frederick T. Dietrich, Secretary of the Appeals Board 9 to be transmitted to the General Fund. For the foregoing reasons, 11 IT IS ORDERED that lien claimant, Priority Care Medical Transportation's, Petition for 12 Reconsideration is GRANTED. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as the Appeals Board's Decision After Reconsideration that the 14 Order Dismissing Lien Claim is AFFIRMED. 15 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, absent written objection showing good cause to the 16 contrary filed and served within fifteen (15) days of the date of service recited below (plus an additional 17 five (5) days for mailing), the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board shall issue an order imposing 18 Labor Code section 5813 sanctions in the amount up to $1, against Innovative Medical 19 Management and lien claimant, Priority Care Medical Transportation, jointly and severally, and in the 20 amount up to $ against lien claimant's hearing representative, Louis Heard, payable to the 21 Workers Compensation Appeals Board and sent to Frederick T. Dietrich, Secretary, Workers' 22 Compensation Appeals Board, for transmission to the General Fund. 23 /// 24 /// 25 //! 26 /// 27 // GONZALEZ, Audelia Mora 4

5 I IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any such written objection shall not be filed electronically 2 through EAMS nor with the district office of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board; instead, any 3 such written objection shall be filed only with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Office of the 4 Commissioners, at either its street address (455 Golden Gate Avenue, 9 th Floor, San Francisco, CA 5 942) or its Post Office Box address (P.O. Box , San Francisco, CA ). 6 7 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 8 9 RtMVI t. CAPLANE 11 ICONCUR, MARGUERITE SE-~ 14 f DE F DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 20 MAY SERVICE MADE ON THE ABOVE DATE ON THE PERSONS LISTED BELOW AT THEIR ADDRESSES SHOWN ON THE CURRENT OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD. 22 AMOS & GALAM 23 AUDELIA MORA GONZALEZ 24 INNOVATIVE MEDICAL MANAGEMENT PRIORITY CARE MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION 25 26JJS/ara 27 GONZALEZ, Audelia Mora 5