Vol. VII No. 9
SEPTEMBER 2001
COMPENSATION
NEWS
MONTHLY REPORT
PENALTY AGAINST AN
INSOLVENT CARRIER
Generally this newsletter deals
with eases that have been
decided by the Court of Appeals.
However, this edition deals with
that occurred before the carrier
became insolvent This case
apparently involved a specific injury.
This case involves a cumulative
trauma. Therefore, Insurance Code
Section 1063.1 (c)(9) comes into play.
Since there is more than one carrier
Golden Eagle now has to pay the
underlying benefits. CIGA would be
dismissed pursuant to Insurance Code
section 1063.1 (c)(9). Therefore, it
would appear Golden Eagle is left
holding the bag. Golden Eagle will
then be responsible for paying the
penalty that California Compensation
created by not paying timely. It would
appear there is no way to alleviate this
problem except assuming liability and
administering an award in every
situation when a carrier feels the other
carrier may be on the verge of
insolvency.
insurance carriers.
The WCJ did not issue a joint and
several award, but apportioned
between the carriers. The WCJ
apportioned 75% of the liability to
California Compensation and 25 % of
the liability to Golden Eagle.
California Compensation was ordered
to pay and administer the award and
seek contribution from Golden Eagle.
California Compensation failed to pay
portions of the award. Applicant then
sought multiple penalties for
California Compensations failure to
pay. California Compensation then
became insolvent. It was placed in
liquidation. The California Insurance
Guarantee Association (CIGA)
assumed control of the cases being
administered by California
Compensation.
The insurer who is primarily
responsible for payment of an award is
solely responsible for penalties that
result from nonpayment of the award.
They are not entitled to contribution
from the codefendant who was not
ordered to pay.
In Carter v, WCAB (1990) 217 Cal.App.
3d 1359, it was decided that CIGA
was liable for penalties for acts
a Writ denied case. Lately, it seems
as if there are multiple carriers going
into or on the verge of liquidation.
Therefore, this case is important if
you are a codefendant on a
cumulative trauma case with a carrier
that is border line insolvent.
Golden
Eagle
tns.
V.WCAB
(Brown)
The applicant alleged a cumulative
trauma against his employer. The
case went to hearing and the
Workers' Compensation Judge
(WCJ) issued a Findings and Award
and Opinion on Decision. The WCJ
found the applicant 100% disabled.
During the period of the cumulative
trauma the employer was insured by
two
Editor: HARVEY BROWN
Firm: Samuelsen, Gonzalez,
Valuenzuela, Brown and Mann
Address: 350 West 5th Street # 105
San Pedro, CA 90731
Phone: 310 831-0872
E-mail: hbrown@sgvbmtaw.com
CONTENTS
Golden Eagle Ins. V.WCAB
(Brown) ................................. 1
Click here for printable version