Proper Identification of Parties. 8 CCR § 10390

What panels did with this rule

Released decisions that named § 10390, with the passage each turned on. A panel decision persuades; it does not bind.

• ADJ7445107 · 2025-10-13 · Van Nuys District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.21. All en banc decisions are binding on panels of the Appeals Board and WCJs, and the binding en banc decisions in Coldiron I and Coldiron II require disclosure of any entities liable for payment and any insurance policies that impact liability for payment.

  The Appeals Board held that defendants must comply with this rule and the Coldiron decisions.

  Official decision · page 2 →
• ADJ13924691 · 2024-12-06 · Oxnard District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.2... 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, to the other parties in any proceeding in which it is a party, and to its own counsel the identity of its client, whether a self-insured employer or insurance carrier. 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. Failure of the administrator to disclose the identity of its client may subject it to sanctions pursuant to Labor Code section 5813.

  The Appeals Board found defendant failed to comply with this duty, which could lead to sanctions and affect enforceability of any award.

  Official decision · page 2 →
• ADJ15137561 · 2024-03-13 · Sacramento District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.3The correct identification of parties is essential to assure that issues of jurisdiction and liability are properly addressed. The importance of timely and proper identification of parties is part of the Appeals Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure and has been emphasized by the Appeals Board in its decisions. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10390 ["[a]ny party that appears at a hearing or files a pleading, document or lien shall... [s]et forth the party's full legal name on the record of proceedings, pleading, document or lien"]; cf. Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 289 (Appeals Board en banc); Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 1466 (Appeals Board en banc).) Moreover, it is expected that attorneys appearing before the WCAB will timely and properly identify their clients. (Id.; Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 5-200.)

  The Board emphasized the importance of timely and proper identification of parties in pleadings and hearings.

  Official decision · page 3 →
• ADJ10918846 · 2023-12-15 · Los Angeles District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.3"... [T]he Labor Code and the Board's rules contain explicit instructions concerning the contents of the record of a case. It is the responsibility of the parties and the WCJ to ensure that the record is complete when a case is submitted for decision on the record." (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corp. (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 477 (Appeals Board en banc).) It is the responsibility of the parties to properly identify the injured worker's employer. (Cal.Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10390; see also: Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 289 (Appeals Board en banc).)

  The record contained inconsistencies regarding employer identification, necessitating clarification and further proceedings.

  Official decision · page 3 →
• ADJ14659603 · 2021-10-14 · San Francisco District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.2FACTUAL BACKGROUND Applicant claims injury to various body parts on April 19, 2021 while employed by the defendant as a public safety officer fire captain. The applicant filed the Application for Adjudication of Claim in the San Francisco District Office on May 13, 2021. Counsel for defendant filed its first Notice of Representation on June 4, 2021. The name of the defendants in the caption read "City of Rohnert Park and Athens Administrator Concord." Defendant filed its first Petition for Change of Venue on June 4, 2021. The name of the defendants in the caption read "City of Rohnert Park (Athens Administrator Concord)". Defendant contends that transferring venue to the Santa Rosa District Office is proper pursuant to Labor Code1 section 5501.5(c). The WCJ issued the first Order Denying Petition for Change of Venue on June 14, 2021. The Order states, in relevant part, "defendant has not included a proper caption nor filed a proper notice of representation pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10390. Defendant may refile an amended petition with a proper caption. There is no indication on the petition for change of venue as to whether the employer is permissibly self-insured and if so, the identity of the third-party administrator." Defendant filed a second Petition for Change of Venue on July 2, 2021.

  Requires proper caption and notice of representation.

  Official decision · page 2 →
• 2004-sp3 · 2004-10-04 · San Jose District Office8 CCR § 10390

  Determinative passage · p.124 [Appeals Board en banc], and that under WCAB Rule 10390 the WCJ should have excused

  Defendant argued this rule should excuse the filing mistake, but the Board found the appeal timely under the former statute.

  Official decision · page 1 →