Jeannie Karaiskos vs. Metagenics, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 Case No. AHM 70712 JEANNIE KARAISKOS, 5 6 Applicant, 7 OPINION AND DECISION AFTER REMITTITUR1 (EN BANC) vs. 8 9 10 11 12 METAGENICS, INC.; CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO., In Liquidation; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION; and RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT LTD. (Servicing Facility), Defendant(s). 13 14 The following Decision After Remittitur is issued pursuant to the Remittitur to this 15 Appeals Board by the Second District Court of Appeal (Division Three), filed June 14, 2004, in 16 which the Court certified that its decision of March 30, 2004 had become final. In that decision, 17 the Court held that the Employment Development Department’s (EDD’s) lien is an obligation to 18 a state because the EDD is a department of the State of California. Hence, its lien claim is not 19 20 21 “covered claim” that CIGA is required to pay. (Ins. Code, § 1063.1, subd. (c)(4).) The Court reversed the Appeals Board’s decision of July 15, 2002 and remanded the matter here for further 22 proceedings in accordance with the Court’s opinion. Accordingly, we will rescind our decision 23 of July 15, 2002 and reinstate and affirm the Appeals Board panel’s decision of June 4, 2001 24 (which found that CIGA is not required to pay EDD.) 25 26 27 1 Commissioner Colleen S. Casey signed the Appeals Board’s prior en banc decision in this matter, but she is no longer a member of the Appeals Board, and it was necessary to assign another panel member in her place. 1 For the foregoing reasons, 2 IT IS ORDERED, that it is the Decision After Remittitur of the Appeals Board (En 3 Banc) that the “Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration (En Banc)” of July 15, 2002 is 4 hereby RESCINDED, and that the “Opinion and Order Dismissing Petition for Reconsideration, 5 Granting Petition for Removal, and Decision After Removal” of June 4, 2001, the relevant 6 portion of which is restated below, is hereby REINSTATED AND AFFIRMED: 7 “[T]he Findings and Order issued by the WCJ on March 13, 2001 is AFFIRMED, except 8 9 that Finding No. 3 and 4 are RESCINDED, and the following new Finding No. 3 is hereby 10 SUBSTITUTED in their place: 11 /// 12 /// 13 /// 14 /// 15 /// 16 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 26 27 /// /// KARAISKOS/VIVEROS, EN BANC 2 “3. The California Insurance Guarantee Association is not required to make payment to 1 2 the Employment Development Department.” 3 4 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD (EN BANC) 5 __________________________________________________ MERLE C. RABINE, Chairman 6 7 8 __________________________________________________ WILLIAM K. O’BRIEN, Commissioner 9 10 __________________________________________________ JAMES C. CUNEO, Commissioner 11 12 __________________________________________________ FRANK M. BRASS, Commissioner 13 14 ____________________________________________________________ 15 JANICE J. MURRAY, Commissioner 16 ___________________________________________________ RONNIE G. CAPLANE, Commissioner 17 18 19 20 DATED AND FILED IN SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 21 July 27, 2004 22 23 24 SERVICE BY MAIL ON SAID DATE TO ALL PARTIES SHOWN ON THE OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD EXCEPT THE LIEN CLAIMANTS. tab 25 26 27 KARAISKOS/VIVEROS, EN BANC 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
