This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
- A worker appealed a decision from the Workers’ Compensation Administration regarding a dispute with his employer and its insurer. The specifics of the dispute leading to the appeal are not detailed in the provided text.
Procedural History
- Appeal from Workers’ Compensation Administration, Leonard J. Padilla, Workers’ Compensation Judge.
Parties' Submissions
- Worker-Appellant: The appellant's arguments or evidence presented in opposition to the summary affirmance are not specified in the provided text (N/A).
- Employer/Insurer-Appellees: The appellees' arguments or evidence supporting the summary affirmance are not specified in the provided text.
Legal Issues
- Whether the Workers’ Compensation Administration's decision should be affirmed due to the absence of an opposing memorandum to the proposed summary disposition.
Disposition
- The decision of the Workers’ Compensation Administration was affirmed (para 2).
Reasons
-
Per Michael E. Vigil, Chief Judge (Emil J. Kiehne, Judge and Jennifer L. Attrep, Judge concurring): The court proposed summary affirmance for reasons stated in a notice of proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing the summary affirmance was filed, and the time for doing so expired, leading to the affirmation of the lower court's decision (paras 1-3).
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.