Court of Appeals, Division II

Obtained favorable decision from the Court of Appeals, Division II upholding the jury verdict at Superior Court which affirmed the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals decision denying reopening application.

Willful Misrepresentation/Fraud orders

Willful Misrepresentation order in the amount of $51,309.37 plus 50% penalty of $25,654.69 for a total of $76,964.06 because claimant willfully misrepresented her physical abilities to work.

Department issues willful misrepresentation order directing claimant to repay the SIE $13,355.63 plus a 50% penalty of $6,677.82 for willfully misrepresenting his ability to return to work.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $105,683.89 plus 50% penalty of $52,841.95 for a total of $158,525.84 because the claimant willfully misrepresented his physical abilities.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $22,653.54 plus a 50% penalty of $11,326.77 because the claimant was working or performing work type activity.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $37,138.32 plus a 50% penalty of $18,569.16 because claimant was working and was misrepresenting his physical abilities.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $19,156.87 plus a 50% penalty of $6,578.44 because claimant willfully misrepresented his physical capabilities and failed to disclose his true capability for work type activity.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $7,710.12 plus a 50% penalty of $3,855.06 because claimant misrepresented she was unable to work for the employer and was concurrently working for two other employers.

Willful misrepresentation order in the amount of $2,653.36 plus a 50% penalty of $1,000 because claimant misrepresented he sustained an industrial injury/occupational disease while in the course of employment and further misrepresented his physical capabilities for work activities. 

Board Decisions

IAJ affirmed the Department’s order which found the claimant able to return to work as a small parts assembler in the labor market where he was last employed and denied time loss for a period of time.

Board Decision and Order reversed the Department of Labor and Industries orders that found the employer was responsible for the claimant’s right upper extremity condition. 

Obtained claimant dismissal of appeal which resulted in Proposed Decision and Order segregating the condition of osteomyelitis.

Obtained appeal dismissal – claim remains closed with no PPD and no further award for time loss

Board Proposed Decision and Order affirming closure and segregating the left femur/hip injury and surgery as not caused or aggravated by the industrial injury.

Board Decision and Order affirming suspension of benefits for claimant non-cooperation with vocational plan.

Superior Court

Employer received a 12-person unanimous jury verdict in Pierce County Superior Court upholding the Board’s decision which denied the claimant’s occupational disease claim for low back.

Employer prevailed before the Mason County Superior Court on claimant’s appeal. The Court ruled in favor of the employer and agreed that the basis for the requested PPD was merely the findings on diagnostic studies showing the arthritis in the knee and the claimant did not prove that her industrial injury caused a permanent aggravation of the condition resulting in PPD. 

Summary Judgment

Obtained Summary Judgment.  Conditions, treatment (including surgery) and inability to work were not caused by the industrial injury.