Coldiron v. Compuware Corp., 02 CAWC, SRO 0088351

Case DateJanuary 01, 2002
CourtCalifornia
CHERYL COLDIRON, Applicant,
v.
COMPUWARE CORPORATION; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, on behalf of RELIANCE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, administered by INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES; formerly administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC., Defendants.
No. SRO 0088351
California Workers Compensation Decisions
Workers Compensation Appeals Board State of California
2002
          OPINION, ORDERS, AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC)           MERLE C. RABINE, Chairman.          On November 26, 2001, the Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration filed by Compuware Corporation (Compuware) in which defendant Compuware challenged the Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on August 31, 2001. In that decision, the WCJ followed and adopted the stipulations of parties as true in finding, among other things, that Cheryl Coldiron (applicant), born October 6, 1955, sustained an admitted industrial injury to her neck and back on January 13, 1995 while employed by Compuware, permissibly self-insured. The WCJ awarded in applicant's favor and against Compuware various benefits including temporary disability, permanent disability indemnity of $28,203.00, less specified credit to defendant for applicant's third-party recovery, and further medical treatment.          The sole issue raised by Compuware in its petition for reconsideration is the entity against whom the benefits should have been awarded by the WCJ, whether against Compuware or against Reliance National Insurance Company (Reliance), the latter the employer's insurance carrier.          After granting reconsideration, the Appeals Board issued an en banc decision1 on March 20, 2002 (for full text of opinion, see Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 289, Board en banc). We held that where an employer's liability for workers' compensation benefits is adjusted by a third-party administrator, the administrator must disclose to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB), to other parties in any proceeding in which it is a party, and to its own counsel, if any, the identity of its client, whether self-insured employer or insurance carrier. We also held that, if the client is an insurance carrier, the administrator must disclose whether the policy includes a "high self-insured retention," a large deductible, or any other provision that affects the identity of the entity actually liable for the payment of compensation. We further held that failure of the administrator to disclose the identity of its client may subject it to sanctions pursuant to Labor Code section 5813. We also stated that this disclosure should be made no later than at least at the commencement of any litigation in the case.          In addition, the Appeals Board issued a Notice of Intention (NIT) to hold a Commissioner's Conference on April 18, 2002, for clarification of the basis for the arrangement between Compuware and Reliance and whether compliance had been met with Insurance Code sections 11650 et seq., particularly sections 11657, 11659 and 11660, whether sanctions of $1,500.00 should be imposed against Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. (Gallagher Bassett) who failed to disclose the identity of Reliance as the insurance carrier for Compuware, and to further answer issues raised in the petition for reconsideration. We note that in its petition for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT