What the panel ordered
Findings and Award issued November 23, 2020, rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
Petition for reconsideration filed by defendant Employers Compensation Insurance Company (ECIC) seeking review of Findings and Award issued by workers' compensation arbitrator on November 23, 2020; petition was timely filed but Appeals Board failed to act within 60 days due to lack of notice; reconsideration granted to study factual and legal issues further.
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
The Appeals Board failed to act on the timely filed petition within 60 days due to lack of notice, which deprived the defendant of due process; the Board equitably tolled the time to act until 60 days after notice was received and granted reconsideration to study the issues further.
From the decision · page 3In this case, the WCA issued the Findings and Award on November 23, 2020, and defendant filed a timely petition on December 17, 2020. However, the first notice to the Appeals Board of the Petition was on May 19, 2021. Due to this lack of notice, the Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days, through no fault of the parties. Therefore, considering that defendant filed a timely petition and that the Appeals Board's failure to act on that petition was in error, we find that our time to act on defendant's petition was equitably tolled until 60 days after May 19, 2021.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Defendant filed a timely petition for reconsideration on December 17, 2020
Favours Applicant prevailed
Established the petition was timely filed and entitled to Board action within 60 days
From the decision · page 3In this case, the WCA issued the Findings and Award on November 23, 2020, and defendant filed a timely petition on December 17, 2020. However, the first notice to the Appeals Board of the Petition was on May 19, 2021. Due to this lack of notice, the Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days, through no fault of the parties. Therefore, considering that defendant filed a timely petition and that the Appeals Board's failure to act on that petition was in error, we find that our time to act on defendant's petition was equitably tolled until 60 days after May 19, 2021.
Appeals Board did not receive notice of the petition until May 19, 2021
Favours Applicant prevailed
The Board's failure to act within 60 days was due to lack of notice, not fault of parties
From the decision · page 3In this case, the WCA issued the Findings and Award on November 23, 2020, and defendant filed a timely petition on December 17, 2020. However, the first notice to the Appeals Board of the Petition was on May 19, 2021. Due to this lack of notice, the Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days, through no fault of the parties. Therefore, considering that defendant filed a timely petition and that the Appeals Board's failure to act on that petition was in error, we find that our time to act on defendant's petition was equitably tolled until 60 days after May 19, 2021.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 5909
Labor Code section 5909
The Board must act on petitions for reconsideration within 60 days of filing unless tolling applies due to lack of notice.
From the decision · page 2Labor Code section 59092 provides that a petition for reconsideration is deemed denied unless the Appeals Board acts on the petition within 60 days of filing. (Lab. Code, § 5909.) However, "it is a fundamental principle of due process that a party may not be deprived of a substantial right without notice...." (Shipley, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th at p. 1108; see Rea v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 625, 635 fn. 22 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 312] ["irregularity which deprives reconsideration under the statutory scheme denies due process"].) In Shipley, applicant sought a writ of review of a decision of the Appeals Board denying his petition for reconsideration by operation of law (Lab. Code, § 5909). The Court there granted a writ of review, stating that while the "language [section 5909] appears mandatory and jurisdictional, the time periods must be based on a presumption that a claimant's file will be available to the board; any other result deprives a claimant of due process and the right to a review by the board." (Shipley, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1107-1108, italics added.)
Shipley v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (7 Cal.App.4th 1103)
Due process requires notice and opportunity to be heard before depriving a party of a substantial right
The Board's failure to act on the petition deprived the defendant of due process, requiring tolling of the 60-day period and reconsideration.
From the decision · page 2Labor Code section 59092 provides that a petition for reconsideration is deemed denied unless the Appeals Board acts on the petition within 60 days of filing. (Lab. Code, § 5909.) However, "it is a fundamental principle of due process that a party may not be deprived of a substantial right without notice...." (Shipley, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th at p. 1108; see Rea v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 625, 635 fn. 22 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 312] ["irregularity which deprives reconsideration under the statutory scheme denies due process"].) In Shipley, applicant sought a writ of review of a decision of the Appeals Board denying his petition for reconsideration by operation of law (Lab. Code, § 5909). The Court there granted a writ of review, stating that while the "language [section 5909] appears mandatory and jurisdictional, the time periods must be based on a presumption that a claimant's file will be available to the board; any other result deprives a claimant of due process and the right to a review by the board." (Shipley, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1107-1108, italics added.)
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Appeals Board's failure to act on the petition within 60 days due to lack of notice
From the decision · page 3In this case, the WCA issued the Findings and Award on November 23, 2020, and defendant filed a timely petition on December 17, 2020. However, the first notice to the Appeals Board of the Petition was on May 19, 2021. Due to this lack of notice, the Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days, through no fault of the parties. Therefore, considering that defendant filed a timely petition and that the Appeals Board's failure to act on that petition was in error, we find that our time to act on defendant's petition was equitably tolled until 60 days after May 19, 2021.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.