 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Esquivel v. Labor Commission of Utah5/23/2000 eeding are considered waived and will not be considered by a court on review. See Brown & Root Indus. Serv. v. Industrial Comm'n, 947 P.2d 671, 677 (Utah 1997); Alvin G. Rhodes Pump Sales v. Industrial Comm'n, 681 P.2d 1244, 1249 (Utah 1984); see also 2 Am. Jur. 2d Administrative Law § 578 (1994); 73A C.J.S. Public Administrative Law § 191 (1983). There are some exceptions to this rule, but they do not apply to this case. See 73A C.J.S. Public Administrative Law § 191. Therefore, we affirm the court of appeals' decision that the Esquivels waived their right to appeal the issue of present value discounting.
Because the Esquivels have waived their right to appeal the appeals board's decision concerning discounting, we do not reach the Esquivels' argument that the appeals board abused its discretion in allowing the discount.
CONCLUSION
The court of appeals erred in deferring to the Labor Commission Appeals Board's interpretation of the statute. In light of the foregoing, we hold that the appeals board did not correctly interpret the statute. We therefore reverse the court of appeals and remand to the Utah Labor Commission for proceedings consistent with this opinion. In addition, we affirm the court of appeals' decision that the Esquivels waived their right to appeal the appeals board's decision concerning discounting.
Chief Justice Howe, Justice Durham, Justice Durrant, and Justice Wilkins concur in Associate Chief Justice Russon's opinion.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Utah Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|