Brakus v. Department of Labor and Industries, No. 33220

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Washington
Writing for the CourtHILL; HAMLEY
Citation292 P.2d 865,48 Wn.2d 218
PartiesDan BRAKUS, Respondent, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES of the State of Washington, Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 33220
Decision Date19 January 1956

Page 218

48 Wn.2d 218
292 P.2d 865
Dan BRAKUS, Respondent,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES of the State of
Washington, Appellant.
No. 33220.
Supreme Court of Washington, Department 2.
Jan. 19, 1956,

Don Eastvold, Atty. Gen.,

Page 219

Edwin R. Roberts, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Holman, Mickelwait, Marion, Black & Perkins, Seattle, for appellant.

Walthew, Oseran & Warner, Seattle, for respondent.

HILL, Justice.

Quaere: Where the department of labor and industries has closed a workman's [292 P.2d 866] claim arising from an industrial injury with an allowance of a certain percentage for permanent partial disability and the workman alone appeals from the closing order to the board of industrial insurance appeals on the sole ground that he is entitled to a greater percentage for permanent partial disability than the department has allowed, can the board, after finding that the workman has not established that any of his permanent partial disability is the result of his industrial injury, reverse the order closing the claim and direct that it be closed with no allowance for permanent partial disability?

Answer: The board of industrial insurance appeals is, as its name indicates, an appeals board. Its authority is limited, as was that of its predecessor, the joint board of the department of labor and industries, to a determination of the issues raised by the notice of appeal (called an application for rehearing prior to the effective date of chapter 219, Laws of 1949, p. 714); and, even though the workman appealing from the closing order fails to establish his right to any award for permanent partial disability, the board does not have the power or authority to reverse or set aside

Page 220

the order of the department allowing a certain percentage for permanent partial disability.

Reasons: At all times pertinent to the present case, the law applicable to appeals from orders of the department of labor and industries to the joint board of the department of labor and industries and its successor, the board of industrial insurance appeals, has provided that the notice of appeal shall set forth 'in full detail' the grounds upon which it is considered that the order, decision, or award appealed from is unjust or unlawful, '* * * and shall include every issue to be considered by the board * * *.' (Italics ours.) Laws of 1951, chapter 225, § 7, p. 685, RCW 51.52.070. The same section of the statute states that:

'The workman, beneficiary, employer, or other person shall be deemed to have waived all objections or irregularities concerning the matter on which such appeal is taken other than those specifically set forth in such notice of appeal or appearing in the records of the department.' (Italics ours.)

See, also, Laws of 1951, chapter 225, § 8, p. 686, RCW 51.52.080, where it is stated that if a hearing is ordered before the board, the board is '* * * to decide the issues raised.' (Italics ours.)

(The statutes just quoted are those currently in effect, but all of the language quoted or its equivalent has been in our statutes at all times since the workman in this case made his application for a rehearing before the joint board of the department of labor and industries, July 1, 1947.)

We have held that,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 practice notes
  • Peterson v. Wash. State Dep't of Labor & Indus., No. 53885-7-II
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 20, 2021
    ...review, which is "limited strictly to the issues raised by the notice of appeal." Brakus v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. , 48 Wash.2d 218, 220, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). The issue here is what "issue" must be raised by the notice of appeal for the Board to consider it: the specific conclusion of law,......
  • Kingery v. Department of Labor and Industries of the State of Wash., No. 64035-1
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • July 22, 1997
    ...Department, it cannot be reviewed by either the Board or the superior court); Brakus v. Department of Labor & Indus., 48 Wash.2d 218, 223, 292 P.2d 865 (1956) (Board has no statutory authority to enlarge the scope of the proceedings or change the issues brought before it by a notice of appe......
  • Peterson v. Wash. State Dep't of Labor & Indus., 53885-7-II
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 20, 2021
    ...lawful scope of its review, which is "limited strictly to the issues raised by the notice of appeal." Brakus v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 48 Wn.2d 218, 220, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). The issue here is what "issue" must be raised by the notice of appeal for the Board to consider it: the specific c......
  • Tollycraft Yachts Corp. v. McCoy, No. 59940-8
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • September 16, 1993
    ...435 potential errors in the adjudication of workers' compensation claims. See Brakus v. Department of Labor & Indus., 48 Wash.2d 218, 221, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). Another is to ensure the " 'proper application and disbursement of the accident fund.' " Wiles v. Department of Labor & Indus., 34 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
23 cases
  • Peterson v. Wash. State Dep't of Labor & Indus., No. 53885-7-II
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 20, 2021
    ...review, which is "limited strictly to the issues raised by the notice of appeal." Brakus v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. , 48 Wash.2d 218, 220, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). The issue here is what "issue" must be raised by the notice of appeal for the Board to consider it: the specific conclusion of law,......
  • Kingery v. Department of Labor and Industries of the State of Wash., No. 64035-1
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • July 22, 1997
    ...Department, it cannot be reviewed by either the Board or the superior court); Brakus v. Department of Labor & Indus., 48 Wash.2d 218, 223, 292 P.2d 865 (1956) (Board has no statutory authority to enlarge the scope of the proceedings or change the issues brought before it by a notice of appe......
  • Peterson v. Wash. State Dep't of Labor & Indus., 53885-7-II
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 20, 2021
    ...lawful scope of its review, which is "limited strictly to the issues raised by the notice of appeal." Brakus v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 48 Wn.2d 218, 220, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). The issue here is what "issue" must be raised by the notice of appeal for the Board to consider it: the specific c......
  • Johns v. State, No. 44983-8-II
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • December 30, 2014
    ...question of law and fact as to whether a 'compensable injury' has occurred and the extent thereof." Brakus v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 48 Wn.2d 218, 220-21, 292 P.2d 865 (1956). The, Board may review only those issues the Department previously decided. Hanquet v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 75......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT