Dear eNewsletter Subscribers:
In this morning's eNewsletter (Jan. 24, 2011), we reported a noteworthy panel decision on sanctions called Garcia v. Silverton Law Offices (see box below). The panel decision was issued Dec. 14. 2010.
It has come to our attention that the WCAB issued a subsequent decision on Dec. 27, 2010 regarding who may be sanctioned.
To read the TIF file for the Dec. 27th decision, click here. Be sure to hit your page down key on your keyboard to see all five pages of the Dec. 27th WCAB decision.
Robin E. Kobayashi, Editor
|RECENT PANEL DECISION - SNEAK PREVIEW|
|Sanctions; EAMS Rules. WCAB, granting removal, rescinded WCJ's order to show cause regarding imposition of $500 sanction issued against e-filer/lien claimant pursuant to LC 5813 and Rule 10561 based on its inadvertent use of form for status conferences rather than lien conferences in filing DOR through EAMS in connection applicant's injury, when sanction order was largely based on two improperly checked boxes (status conference vs. lien conference) on an e-form which was recently changed, change was not yet reflected in E-form Filing Reference Guide, e-filer's agreement with DWC contained no provision for imposition of sanction or penalty for such error nor did WCJ cite any legal authority to support sanction, e-form was actually filed by lien claimant's litigation manager who was not a party, attorney or independent representative for purpose of imposing sanctions under Rule 10250(c), and there was no showing of bad faith to justify sanctions as required by LC 5813. See Garcia panel decision (Dec. 14, 2011).
|LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used under license. Other products or services may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies. |
Privacy & Security Copyright © 2011 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.