All Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals appeal proceedings will be remote access until July 3rd. The Board has extended the period of time that Board offices will remain closed to the public due to the Coronavirus.
Board judges will typically handle proceedings by telephone conference calls. In certain circumstances, the judge may opt for video conferencing using a third-party service, CourtCall. This is usually for the purpose of hearings, where evidence and testimony is presented, rather than more informal procedural events.
Prior to this extension, Board judges had converted all case proceedings scheduled through May of this year to telephone or CourtCall events. If you have proceedings set through May, there should be no need to change them. Any court proceedings scheduled as in-person events during June – July 3 will need to be addressed.
Conferences and Hearings to Be Adjusted
Board judges will reach out to those parties with events in June and early July. The judge will ask if they can convert the proceedings from live to remote-access events. In the event that a party is aggrieved that the appeal proceedings will be remote, a request can be made for the case to be continued to a later date. This would most likely be in the case of a hearing. This decision is at the judge’s discretion. Any rescheduled event date is subject to the availability of the judges and parties and will likely cause a delay in proceedings.
More Information and Assistance
More information can be found on the Board’s website. If you have an appeal pending, you may also contact the judge assigned to your case, or their assistant.
We often suggest that claimants have legal representation when their case is on appeal. This may be especially true when appeal proceedings will be remote access. Feel free to contact our firm for assistance with your case. We offer a free analysis of your case and will give you our opinion on whether you need legal assistance, or not, and how we recommend you proceed.
The Claimant’s name has been changed to insure confidentiality.
Our clients who are embroiled in litigation in their seemingly straightforward workers’ comp cases are often shocked when we tell them how long it may likely take to get a final decision. We recently prevailed in a case that serves as an exemplar of what the litigation process can involve.
David performed maintenance and repair for about five years on large construction equipment, requiring heavy lifting, carrying, torqueing, and other strength maneuvers in awkward positions, all affecting a shoulder condition that had its origins 30 years before in a diving injury followed by an injury on the job to the same shoulder that required surgery. He had worked at vigorous labor for the ensuing 25 years with no limitations until his work for the last company aggravated his shoulder, disabling him from work and leading to a partial shoulder replacement surgery.
Here’s how the claim went: David filed to reopen his 30-year old injury claim, but the Dept. of Labor & Industries (L&I) denied the reopening because of information about the recent work activity. He then filed a claim based on injury from his last repair/maintenance work, and the claim was allowed as an “injury.” The employer protested the allowance, and L&I took it back for further review. It was then allowed as an “occupational condition or disease” based on the aggravating effect of the cumulative trauma on David’s pre-existing but non-disabling shoulder condition. The employer then appealed that order to the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (BIIA) – our workers’ compensation “trial court” – and months later full hearings were conducted with live testimony from David and depositions of four medical witnesses.
Months after that, the BIIA judge who heard the evidence issued a decision fully favorable to David, and upholding the L&I allowance order. The employer then requested reconsideration of the judge’s decision. That was denied, and the employer then filed an appeal to superior court requesting a jury trial. Many months later, the case was tried to a jury and the jury upheld the BIIA’s and L&I’s decisions. At that point, the employer had been given five shots at overturning the allowance of David’s claim.
How long did all this take in a case with a seemingly straightforward medical issue?
December, 2009 to July, 2012 – over 2 ½ years!
An interesting side-note to this case: Our Rule 9 intern, Brian Wright, recently graduated from Seattle University School of Law and preparing to take the bar examination later this month, assisted me in trying the case in superior court. I turned over closing argument to the jury to Brian, and he did a great job, beating a seasoned defense lawyer I’ve been litigating against for 20 years or so. At Causey Law Firm we’re wagering that Brian is the only Rule 9 intern in the state to prevail over an experienced lawyer in a superior court jury trial this year!