Don’t Believe The Hype: Almaraz/Guzman is the law!
Get your head out of the sand!
UPDATE 9/3/2009: Download the new en banc Ogilvie II and Almaraz/Guzman II decisions here!
There are numerous workers’ compensation professionals who are incredibly unhappy with Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman. Vocational experts are unhappy with Ogilvie, and somewhat hopeful with Almaraz/Guzman. Impairment rating specialists are not happy with Ogilvie or Almaraz/Guzman. These people may be unhappy with these new cases, but at least they’re starting to adapt.
As Julius Young of WorkCompZone.com just reported, some people are dealing with Almaraz/Guzman by putting on “webinars.” Phil Walker and Christopher Brigham have each announced “webinars.” According to Walker’s promotional e-mail, he charges $2,000.00 to appear for a one day seminar – and now he’s giving it away for free.
People will try to convince you that Almaraz/Guzman is not the law or “just” a WCAB decision. Do not believe these people. Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman are both en banc cases.
En banc decisions of the Appeals Board are binding precedent on all Appeals Board panels and workers’ compensation judges. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10341; City of Long Beach v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Garcia) (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 298, 313, fn. 5 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 109, 120, fn. 5]; Gee v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1418, 1425, fn. 6 [67 Cal.Comp.Cases 236, 239, fn. 6]; see also Gov. Code, § 11425.60(b).)
Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman are binding precedent on judges and the WCAB itself. Don’t believe the hype and don’t stick your head in the sand. 1 If you argue it is not the law or not binding precedent, you will lose. Yes, these cases may be appealed and may even be overturned.
I think it likely they will be appealled and highly unlikely they will be overturned.
- Photo courtesy of blakeimeson [↩]
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
[…] you agree with Almaraz/Guzman, it’s still good law and must be […]
[…] Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman are still the law. Despite Commissioner Aghazarian’s two concurring opinions, the WCAB did not issue a stay of either Ogilvie or Almaraz/Guzman. […]
[…] The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board recently solicited amicus briefs regarding the Weiner v. Ralphs case. After review of the amicus briefs on the topic of the repeal of Labor Code Section 139.5 and vocational rehabilitation, the WCAB has just issued their en banc opinion.[1] […]
[…] think the WCAB intended this consequence. Don’t get upset with me – as long as Ogilvie is the law, I might as well make the Ogilvie calculation easy for you, […]