AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Worker-Appellant appealed the decision of the Workers Compensation Administration (WCA) that denied his motion for reconsideration to amend his compensation order. The Worker-Appellant, representing himself, failed to file a memorandum in opposition to the proposed summary affirmance, instead submitting a document that did not address the court's discussion points (para 1).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Worker-Appellant: Submitted a document that appears to be a motion and proposed order, which did not address the court's discussion points in the proposed summary affirmance (para 1).
• Employer-Appellees: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Worker-Appellant's motion for reconsideration to amend his compensation order should be granted (para 1).

Disposition

• The court affirmed the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Judge, denying the Worker-Appellant's motion for reconsideration to amend his compensation order (para 3).

Reasons

• JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge (JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge, LINDA M. VANZI, Judge concurring): The court decided to affirm the Workers’ Compensation Judge's decision due to the Worker-Appellant's failure to provide any argument opposing the proposed summary affirmance. The Worker-Appellant's submission did not follow the Rules of Appellate Procedure, as it did not address the court's discussion points and instead submitted a document that was not recognized by the court's procedural rules. The court also noted the improper use of a document that bore the Court of Appeals letterhead and concluded with directory language, which was construed as a proposed order submitted for the court's consideration. The court emphasized that future filings by the Worker-Appellant should adhere to the Appellate Rules (paras 1-3).