A. If the employer and the injured employee or his dependents fail to reach an agreement in regard to compensation under this title, or if they have reached such an agreement which has been signed and filed with the Commission and compensation has been paid or is due in accordance therewith and the parties thereto then disagree as to the continuance of any weekly payment under such agreement, either party may make application to the Commission for a hearing in regard to the matters at issue and for a ruling thereon.
B. Immediately after such application has been received the Commission shall set the date for a hearing, which shall be held as soon as practicable, and shall notify the parties at issue of the time and place of such hearing. The hearing shall be held in the city or county where the injury occurred, or in a contiguous city or county, unless otherwise designated by the Commission.
Code 1950, § 65-91; 1968, c. 660, § 65.1-94; 1974, c. 315; 1991, c. 355; 1993, c. 693.
Notes of Decisions
Watts v. P. & J Hauling, Inc., 584 S.E.2d 457 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Second, if a claimant signs an agreement with which he later disagrees, he may withdraw from the agreement prior to its approval.”
United Parcel Serv., Inc. v. Ilg, 679 S.E.2d 545 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “2-705(A), the award or ruling deciding the disputed issues raised at the hearing becomes “conclusive and binding as to all questions of fact.”
Tracy A. Irby v. LifePoint Health & Saf. Nat'l Cas. Corp. (Va. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 10× “In the absence of a properly executed and approved agreement, Code § 65.2-702(A) clearly grants the Commission the authority to decide the merits of Irby’s claim for benefits, pursuant to LifePoint’s request for review.”
Cynthia Colyer Allen v. Cnty. of Henrico Pub. Schs. (Va. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 3× ““By statute, the Commission’s award is conclusive and binding on this Court as to all questions of fact when 2 Although claimant argued to the Commission that employer could not request to have a permanent partial disability claim placed on the docket, the Commission ruled…”
The Est. of Alejandro Enrique Aguilar Ho v. Info. Tech. Solutions (Va. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “2-713 (allowing commission, in its discretion, to sanction an employer or insurer who has “brought, prosecuted, or defended [a] proceeding[] without reasonable grounds” or who has “delayed payment without reasonable grounds” by “assessing against the [offending] employer or…”
Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-702(A): 2 cases
Tracy A. Irby v. LifePoint Health & Saf. Nat'l Cas. Corp. (Va. Ct. App. 2020).
“In the absence of a properly executed and approved agreement, Code § 65.2-702(A) clearly grants the Commission the authority to decide the merits of Irby’s claim for benefits, pursuant to LifePoint’s request for review.”
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.