A. Any party feeling aggrieved by the judgment, decision, or award made by the administrative law judge may, within ten (10) days of issuance, appeal to the Workers' Compensation Commission. After hearing arguments, the Commission may reverse or modify the decision only if it determines that the decision was against the clear weight of the evidence or contrary to law. All such proceedings of the Commission shall be recorded by a court reporter, if requested by any party. Any judgment of the Commission which reverses a decision of the administrative law judge shall contain specific findings relating to the reversal.
B. The appellant shall pay a filing fee of One Hundred Seventy- five Dollars ($175.00) to the Commission at the time of filing his or her appeal. The fee shall be deposited to the credit of the Workers' Compensation Commission Revolving Fund. C. The judgment, decision or award of the Commission shall be final and conclusive on all questions within its jurisdiction between the parties unless an action is commenced in the Supreme Court of this state to review the judgment, decision or award within twenty (20) days of being sent to the parties. Any judgment, decision or award made by an administrative law judge shall be stayed until all appeal rights have been waived or exhausted. The Supreme Court may modify, reverse, remand for rehearing, or set aside the judgment or award only if it was: 1. In violation of constitutional provisions; 2. In excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the Commission; 3. Made on unlawful procedure; 4. Affected by other error of law; 5. Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, material, probative and substantial competent evidence; 6. Arbitrary or capricious; 7. Procured by fraud; or 8. Missing findings of fact on issues essential to the decision. This action shall be commenced by filing with the Clerk of the Supreme Court a certified copy of the judgment, decision or award of the Commission attached to the petition by the complaint which shall specify why the judgment, decision or award is erroneous or illegal. The proceedings shall be heard in a summary manner and shall have precedence over all other civil cases in the Supreme Court, except preferred Corporation Commission appeals. The Supreme Court shall require the appealing party to file within forty-five (45) days from the date of the filing of an appeal or a judgment appealed from, a transcript of the record of the proceedings before the Commission, or such later time as may be granted by the Supreme Court on application and for good cause shown. The action shall be subject to the law and practice applicable to other civil actions cognizable in the Supreme Court. D. A fee of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per appeal to the Supreme Court shall be paid to the Commission and deposited to the credit of the Workers' Compensation Commission Revolving Fund as costs for preparing, assembling, indexing and transmitting the record for appellate review. This fee shall be paid by the party taking the appeal. If more than one party to the action files an appeal from the same judgment, decision or award, the fee shall be paid by the party whose petition in error commences the principal appeal.
Added by Laws 2013, c. 208, § 78, eff. Feb. 1, 2014. Amended by Laws 2019, c. 476, § 29, emerg. eff. May 28, 2019.
Notes of Decisions
Stricklen v. Multiple Injury Trust Fund, 2024 OK 1 (Okla. 2024).
· cites it 12× “85A O.S.Supp.2019 §78 (C) states in part: "The Supreme Court may modify, reverse, remand for rehearing, or set aside the judgment or award only if it was:.”
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
· cites it 20× “85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
Mullendore v. Mercy Hosp. Ardmore, 2019 OK 11 (Okla. 2019).
“Mullendore's slip on the floor on March 22, 2014 is the 'major cause of the injury and need for treatment to her right leg/knee.”
Question Submitted by: Chairman Robert H. Gilliland, Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 2015 OK AG 8 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2015).
· cites it 2× “The Workers' Compensation Commissioners are empowered to act as an appellate tribunal in three types of appeals: review of decisions or awards made by the Commission's Administrative Law Judges, 85A O.S.Supp.2014, § 78 (A); review of adverse benefit determinations under the…”
Holliman v. Twister Drilling Co., 2016 OK 82 (Okla. 2016).
· cites it 3× “CONCUR: Reif CJ, Combs VCJ, Kauger, Edmondson, Colbert, and Gurich, JJ. DISSENT: Winchester, Taylor, JJ.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(A) — 3 cases
Stricklen v. Multiple Injury Trust Fund, 2024 OK 1 (Okla. 2024).
“85A O.S.Supp.2019 §78 (C) states in part: "The Supreme Court may modify, reverse, remand for rehearing, or set aside the judgment or award only if it was:.”
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
Question Submitted by: Chairman Robert H. Gilliland, Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 2015 OK AG 8 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2015).
“The Workers' Compensation Commissioners are empowered to act as an appellate tribunal in three types of appeals: review of decisions or awards made by the Commission's Administrative Law Judges, 85A O.S.Supp.2014, § 78 (A); review of adverse benefit determinations under the…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(C) — 7 cases
Stricklen v. Multiple Injury Trust Fund, 2024 OK 1 (Okla. 2024).
“85A O.S.Supp.2019 §78 (C) states in part: "The Supreme Court may modify, reverse, remand for rehearing, or set aside the judgment or award only if it was:.”
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(C)(1) — 2 cases
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(C)(2) — 1 case
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(C)(4) — 3 cases
Stricklen v. Multiple Injury Trust Fund, 2024 OK 1 (Okla. 2024).
“85A O.S.Supp.2019 §78 (C) states in part: "The Supreme Court may modify, reverse, remand for rehearing, or set aside the judgment or award only if it was:.”
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(C)(5) — 4 cases
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
Mullendore v. Mercy Hosp. Ardmore, 2019 OK 11 (Okla. 2019).
“Mullendore's slip on the floor on March 22, 2014 is the 'major cause of the injury and need for treatment to her right leg/knee.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 85A, § 78(c)(2) — 1 case
Johnson v. Midwest City Del City Pub. Schs., 2021 OK 29 (Okla. 2021).
“85A O.S. § 78(A). The majority applies the wrong standard of review and conducts a reweighing of the evidence identical to that conducted by the Commission, which is not authorized by § 78(C).”
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.