“The parties to a controversy may stipulate the facts relative thereto in writing and file such stipulation with the appeals board. The appeals board may thereupon make its findings and award based upon such stipulation, or may set the matter down for hearing and take further testimony or make the further investigation necessary to enable it to determine the matter in controversy.”
(Lab. Code, § 5702, as quoted in Gaines, supra, at p. 15.)
“(b) The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board shall inquire into the adequacy of all Compromise and Release agreements and Stipulations with Request for Award, and may set the matter for hearing to take evidence when necessary to determine whether the agreement should be approved or disapproved, or issue findings and awards.”
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10700(b), as quoted in Gaines, supra, at p. 18.)
“After reviewing a proposed settlement, the WCJ may issue an OSA.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 16, citing Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, §§ 10700(b), 10789(e).)
“An OSA more commonly issues where a minor error has occurred, which can be easily corrected without a formal hearing. In such a case, the OSA operates in a similar manner as a notice of intent.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 16, citing Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10832.)
“This is generally an accepted practice, particularly since workers’ compensation proceedings have traditionally proceeded with a degree of informality.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 16, citing Lab. Code, §§ 5708, 5709.)
“When a settlement is submitted for approval, it is submitted as a stipulation that is signed by all parties, with a joint request that the stipulation be approved. (§ 5702.) There is generally no issue of due process when a WCJ approves a joint request of the parties.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 15.)
“[W]hen the WCJ intends to reject a settlement or requires additional information before approving a settlement, the WCJ must provide adequate due process, which includes notice and an opportunity to be heard.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 15.)
“[A]n evidentiary hearing should be set where the terms of the agreement are unclear, contradictory, include provisions that are outside the Labor Code, the concern over adequacy is significant, and / or the parties fail to provide a sufficient response to the OSA.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 16.)
“Where the record does not adequately explain the value of the settlement, the WCJ may properly request supporting materials, including relevant medical records, civil case information in limited circumstances, and documentation supporting a request for attorney’s fees, and may delay approval until sufficient information is provided. However, the WCJ may not use an order suspending action to compel medical evaluations, dismissal with prejudice, or a reduction of attorney’s fees without notice, due process, and an appropriate record. The governing inquiry is whether the settlement is adequately supported by the information submitted, and if it is not, the proper remedy is to develop the record through appropriate procedures, including a hearing to create an evidentiary record.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 23.)
“We would also note that a dismissal with prejudice is generally reserved for cases that are being dismissed on the merits. Where a party seeks dismissal based on reasons other than the merits of litigation, e.g. lack of prosecution, the appropriate order is dismissal without prejudice.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 22, fn. 10 [seeds ch. 16].)
“Pursuant to section 5702, the WCJ may seek further information or may set a hearing.”
(Gaines, supra, at p. 16, citing Lab. Code, § 5702.)
← § 19.2 · § 19.4 → · this section in the book