54 Van Natta 205 (2002). VASILIY TKACHEV, Claimant.
Case Date | April 24, 2002 |
Court | Oregon |
Oregon Worker Compensation
2002.
54 Van Natta 205 (2002).
VASILIY TKACHEV, Claimant
205In the Matter of the Compensation of VASILIY
TKACHEV, ClaimantWCB Case No. 01-06757SECOND ORDER OF DISMISSALRaymond Bradley, Claimant AttorneysJohnson Nyburg and Andersen, Defense
AttorneysReviewing Panel:
Members Biehl and Bock.Claimant requests
reconsideration of our February 15, 2002 order that dismissed his request for
review of an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) order. Based on the following reasoning, we adhere to our previous conclusion
that the request for Board review was untimely filed. An ALJ's order is final, unless, within 30 days after the date on which a
copy of the order is mailed to the parties, one of the parties requests Board
review under ORS 656.295. See ORS 656.289(3). Requests for
Board review shall be mailed to the Board and copies of the request shall be
mailed to all parties to the proceeding before the ALJ. ORS 656.295(2).
"Filing" of a request for review is the physical delivery of a thing to any
permanently staffed office of the Board, or the date of mailing. OAR 438-005-
0046(1)(a). Failure to timely file the request for
review requires dismissal of the request for review. Mosley v. Sacred
Heart Hospital, 113 Or App 234, 237 (1992). Here, the 30th day after the ALJ's December 26, 2001 order was January
25, 2002. Claimant's attorney's letter, however, was
not received by the Board until February 8, 2002,
more than 30 days from the ALJ's December 26, 2001 order. On reconsideration, claimant's attorney again contends that he did not
receive a copy of the ALJ's order.1 However, ORS 656.289(2) requires the
ALJ's order to be sent to all "parties in interest."
"Party" means a claimant for compensation, the employer of the injured worker
at the time of the injury and the insurer, if any, of such employer. ORS
656.005(21). Attorneys are not considered "parties." See Haskell
Corporation v. Filippi, 152 Or App 117, 123 (1998). Thus, as we stated
in our initial Order of Dismissal, an attorney's failure to receive a copy of
the order does not necessitate republication. SeeDebbie R. Coldiron, 51 Van Natta 991
(1999); Lee R. Jones, 48 Van Natta 1286, 1287 (1996). 1 Claimant's attorney has been provided with copies of both
the ALJ's order and our initial Order of Dismissal.
54 Van Natta 205 (2002)206Claimant also asks for an...
To continue reading
Request your trial