(a) Following an informal conference at which agreement is reached on all issues, the district director must (within 10 days after conclusion of the conference), embody the agreement in a memorandum or within 30 days issue a formal compensation order, to be filed and served in accordance with § 702.349. If either party requests that a formal compensation order be issued, the district director must, within 30 days of such request, prepare, file, and serve such order in accordance with § 702.349. Where the problem was of such nature that it was resolved by telephone discussion or by exchange of written correspondence, the district director must prepare a memorandum or order setting forth the terms agreed upon and notify the parties either by telephone or in writing, as appropriate. In either instance, when the employer or carrier has agreed to pay, reinstate or increase monetary compensation benefits, or to restore or appropriately change medical care benefits, such action must be commenced immediately upon becoming aware of the agreement, and without awaiting receipt of the memorandum or the formal compensation order.
(b) Where there are several conferences or discussions, the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section do not apply until the last conference. The district director must, however, prepare and place in his administrative file a short, succinct memorandum of each preceding conference or discussion.
[80 FR 12930, Mar. 12, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Roberts v. Sea-Land Servs., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1350 (2012).
· cites it 2× “Likewise, 20 CFR §702.315 (a) applies only in the case of a claim or an employer’s no- tice of controversion.”
Frederico Rodriguez v. Compass Shipping Co. Ltd. & Djakarta Lloyd, P.N., 617 F.2d 955 (2d Cir. 1980).
· cites it 3× “Title 20 C.F.R. § 702.315 , as it read at the timé of the settlement, obligated the employer to commence paying the compensation benefits immediately, without regard to whether the deputy commissioner, acting personally or through his designee, see 20 C.”
Rodriguez v. Compass Shipping Co., 451 U.S. 596 (1981).
“Although a since-amended regulation ■required that such settlements be embodied in formal compensation orders, see 20 CFR § 702.315 (a) (1976), no formal orders were entered in these cases.”
Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. Reid, 666 A.2d 41 (D.C. 1995).
· cites it 3× “at 1996 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 702.315 (a) (1982)). The regulations for DOES are quite similar to the DOL regulations referred to by the Supreme Court.”
Rodriguez v. Compass Shipping Co. Ltd., 456 F. Supp. 1014 (S.D.N.Y. 1978).
“315(a) of the Regulations,” presumably meaning 20 C.F.R. § 702.315 (a). The document is signed by the plaintiff, his representative, a representative of the employer and the “claims examiner.”
Strachan Shipping Co. v. Nash, 782 F.2d 513 (5th Cir. 1986).
“” Then in § 908(i)(l), the statute provides that in the best interests of the injured employee the Deputy Commissioner “may approve agreed settlements of the interested parties, discharging the liability of the employer' for such compensation.”
Brunetti v. Cape Canaveral Shipping Co., SA, 572 F. Supp. 854 (S.D.N.Y. 1983).
· cites it 3× “Where, as here, the employee, upon signing the compensation agreement with the assistance and co-signature of his counsel, is fully aware of his rights, including his right to sue within six months, the failure of an administrator to comply with the formality imposed by…”
Ramon Costa v. Danais Shipping Co. & Kratigos Shipping Co., 714 F.2d 1 (3rd Cir. 1983).
“The Court observed that its interpretation of the statute does not prejudice employers because they may still obtain a compensation order upon request if voluntary payments are made and no disagreement with the longshoreman exists.”
Barulec v. Skou, 471 F. Supp. 358 (S.D.N.Y. 1979).
“§ 919 (c), and the regulations effective at the time Barulec’s claim was processed require, 20 C.F.R. §§ 702.315 (a), .348 (1976), 4 that every claim submitted to the OWCP culminate in a formal order rejecting the claim or making an award on it.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 702.315(a) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.