The enforcement provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act [WCA] are strictly limited. Judges of Compensation are mandated to follow the statute, regulations and the specific facts in addressing enforcement issues.
A public entity employee filed a claim for an occupational pulmonary claim and unfortunately died during the pending of the claim. The dependency claim followed and was settled for a lump sum on August 15, 2017. On August 22, 2017 the public entity sent a statutorily mandated vouched for the dependent’s signature. The dependent finally signed and returned the voucher in January 2018 and payment was promptly made. Between the time the voucher was finally signed the petitioner’s lawyer moved for penalties. The enforcement motion was entered in February 2018 without a hearing and without finding of facts being made.
The trial judge who imposed a 76% penalty ($5,000), a counsel fee ($500) and a stenographic fee against an employer (public entity) on a purported delay in payment of a lump sum payment of $7,500 (public entity's share of the settlement) was reversed on appeal.
The Appellate Court directed its attention to the enforcement provisions of the WCA and evaluating the underlying facts and the trial judges’ apparent failure to hold a hearing on the issue and address findings of fact that would give rise to substantial credible evidence. N.J.S.A. 34:15-28.2, N.J.A.C. 12:235-3.16(e).
This decision is the second time this month that a reviewing tribunal has directed its attention to the limited enforcement powers of Judge of Compensation and the operative case law. See the sentinel case on enforcement, Stancil v. ACE USA, 418 N.J. Super. 79, 88 (App. Div. 2011), aff’d, 211 N.J. 276 (2012) that addresses the limited realm of temporary disability payments. Historically, enforcement of payment mandated by Stancil and embodies subsequent statutory/regulatory language deals only with the payment temporary disability benefits.
While not mentioning the principles of equity in its opinion, the decision also reviewed the delay and inaction of the petitioner/dependent and her attorney in not timely complying with statutorily mandated compliance for a public entity to make payment. Local Fiscal Affairs Law, N.J.S.A. 40A:51 to -50 that requires a signed voucher from the payee.
RAMELLA v. BOROUGH OF SEASIDE HEIGHTS, DOCKET NO. A-3310-17T3, 2019 WL 1513649, Decided April 8, 2019
UNPUBLISHED OPINION. CHECK COURT RULES BEFORE CITING.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
This opinion shall not “constitute precedent or be binding upon any court.” Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
See also:
Medical Treatment is an Exclusive Remedy Not a Reasonable Accommodation (3/26/19)The Inherent Judicial Power of Judges of Compensation (10/21/17)
….
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com has been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com has been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
