Young

Young v. Gannon

Good Law
118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 187·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 2239·2002 Daily Journal DAR 3411·97 Cal. App. 4th 209·67 Cal. Comp. Cases 411
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2002B146236California5,821 words

Opinion

Opinion

Spencer, J.

Introduction

John D. Young appeals from a judgment denying his petition for writ of mandate. We affirm the judgment.

Statement of Facts

Appellant’s Termination as a Workers’ Compensation Judge

Appellant was appointed to be a Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) for the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). In June 1994, he attended new judges’ training, which included presentations on the timeliness of decisions. Thereafter, in at least two quarterly trainings, he received instruction on the 90-day rule. Under this rule, a WCJ may not receive his or her salary while any cause remains pending and undetermined for 90 days after submission. At the end of a pay period, a WCJ must sign and submit an affidavit under penalty of perjury, that to the best of his or her belief, no cause remains pending and undetermined that was submitted 90 days prior to the first day of the next pay period.

In the fall of 1997, appellant’s supervisor, Presiding WCJ Barbara Burke (Burke), met with him after reviewing a statistical report showing that he had been delinquent in completing his decisions. They discussed the term “filed in the record” within the context of the 90-day rule.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.