Whether the appeal was perfected is crucial to the parties herein. As we explain in our opinion, the vocational rehabilitation program was repealed as of January 1, 2009. If an appeal of a decision of the Rehabilitation Unit was still pending as of January 1, 2009, that decision, not being final, could not be enforced after that date. On the other hand, if a decision of the Rehabilitation Unit entered prior to January 1, 2008 was final (and is not on appeal) before that date, the award is enforceable.
We conclude that the Declaration of Readiness to Proceed was not required to perfect the appeal from the decision of the Rehabilitation Unit and we therefore annul the WCAB‟s decision.
We granted the petition for review filed by Kroger and Sedgwick in order to set aside the WCAB‟s erroneous decision and also because the vitality of appeals taken from decisions of the Rehabilitation Unit prior to January 1, 2008 appears to surface from time to time, even though the scheme of vocational rehabilitation has been repealed. Why this issue can arise after the repeal of the underlying program is explained in our opinion.
Judge(s): Jeffrey W. Johnson
Jurisdiction: California Court of Appeals, Second District
Related Categories: Employment
|Trial Court Judge(s)|
|Court of Appeals Judge(s)|
|Appellant Lawyer(s)||Appellant Law Firm(s)|
|Louis Larres||Bradford & Barthel|
|Appellee Lawyer(s)||Appellee Law Firm(s)|
|Jaclyn Shandler||Law Offices of Shandler & Associates|