Skip to main content
contact us

Copyright SJKP LLP Law Firm all rights reserved

Insights

A curated collection of observations, industry developments, and firm perspectives on legal trends and business issues. These materials are provided for general informational and educational purposes only and are not legal advice. For guidance tailored to your specific situation, please contact our attorneys.

Occupational Injury Administrative Litigation

In Washington D.C., occupational injury administrative litigation provides a legal remedy for workers denied compensation for work-related injuries or illnesses. If the Department of Employment Services (DOES) or an insurance carrier rejects a claim, the injured employee may pursue judicial review through administrative litigation. This article explains the meaning, filing process, and procedures of occupational injury administrative litigation in Washington D.C.

contents


1. Occupational Injury Administrative Litigation Washington D.C.: Overview


Occupational injury administrative litigation begins when a worker challenges an unfavorable decision on their workers' compensation claim. This process is the final appeal after all internal administrative remedies within DOES have been exhausted. The goal is to ensure the administrative decision is legally sound, based on substantial evidence, and correctly interprets the relevant statutes.



Administrative Litigation Defined


In D.C., the Workers' Compensation Program is managed by the Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWC) under the DOES. If OWC denies compensation, the claimant first files for a Formal Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). If the ALJ's outcome is unsatisfactory, the claimant appeals to the Compensation Review Board (CRB). Finally, the claimant can challenge the CRB's final administrative decision through judicial review at the D.C. Court of Appeals, which is the administrative litigation phase.



Parties to the Workers' Compensation Appeal


The injured worker or surviving dependents typically serve as the petitioner in the litigation. They seek to overturn an administrative decision that denied benefits under the D.C. Workers' Compensation Act. The petitioner must demonstrate that the agency committed an error of law or procedure. The official respondent before the Court of Appeals is the DOES, defending the administrative ruling. In earlier administrative stages, the employer or their insurer is the primary respondent.



2. Occupational Injury Administrative Litigation Washington D.C.: Filing Requirements


The litigation process begins only after exhausting all administrative remedies, including a formal hearing and a CRB appeal. Judicial review focuses solely on the existing administrative record; no new evidence or testimony can be presented. Strict adherence to procedural rules and deadlines is mandatory for the appeal.



Petition for Review Content


The Petition for Review submitted to the D.C. Court of Appeals must contain specific information required to initiate judicial review. This document outlines the legal basis for the appeal.

  • Petitioner Information: Full name and contact information of the petitioner.
  • Challenged Decision: Clear identification of the final agency decision being challenged (CRB's decision).
  • Contesting Grounds: Specific legal grounds for contesting the decision, detailing alleged errors of law or procedure.
  • Required Attachments: All prior rulings, hearing transcripts, and the complete administrative record are attached.


Adhering to Filing Deadlines


Washington D.C. imposes strict deadlines for filing a Petition for Review. Missing this timeline is often fatal to the appeal. Under D.C. Code § 1-606.03(c), a petition must be filed within 30 calendar days of the final decision by the Compensation Review Board (CRB). This 30-day period is jurisdictional, meaning the Court of Appeals generally lacks the authority to hear the case if the deadline is missed.



3. Occupational Injury Administrative Litigation Washington D.C.: The Judicial Review Process


The judicial review process at the D.C. Court of Appeals is governed by the Rules of the Court and is primarily a review of the written record. The court's role is not to re-weigh the evidence but to determine if the administrative agency acted within its legal authority and followed due process.



Litigation Procedure Steps


The following stages summarize the occupational injury administrative litigation procedure in Washington D.C.:

  • Initial Filing: The petitioner files a Notice of Appeal and the Petition for Review with the D.C. Court of Appeals, including the required filing fee.
  • Record Transmission: The agency (DOES/CRB) must deliver the official administrative record to the court within the set timeframe.
  • Briefing Schedule: The court issues a schedule for the submission of legal briefs. The petitioner files the opening brief, followed by the respondent's brief.
  • Oral Arguments: In select cases, the court schedules oral arguments. However, many appeals are decided solely based on the written submissions.
  • Decision and Judgment: The court issues its judgment. The court may affirm (uphold), reverse (overturn the denial), or remand (send the case back) to the agency for further proceedings.


4. Occupational Injury Administrative Litigation Washington D.C.: Strategy and Legal Support


Establishing solid legal grounds and documentation is vital when pursuing this litigation. Effective legal strategy is crucial because the Court of Appeals reviews the case for reversible errors, not simple factual disagreement. Successfully demonstrating an error requires a meticulous approach.



Key Strategic Considerations


For a successful appeal, the petitioner's brief must clearly demonstrate that the agency’s final decision contains a reversible error. The legal arguments typically focus on one or more of these critical grounds:

  • Lack of Substantial Evidence: The decision was unsupported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.
  • Violation of Due Process: The agency committed a procedural error that violated the petitioner's right to a fair hearing.
  • Legal Interpretation Error: The agency made a legal error in interpreting the D.C. Workers' Compensation Act or established precedent.
  • Arbitrary or Capricious: The decision was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.


Professional Legal Assistance


Given the technical nature of workers’ compensation statutes, the procedural rules, and the standard of review, claimants are strongly advised to seek support from legal professionals. Attorneys familiar with the complexities of D.C.’s administrative litigation systems significantly increase the chances of a favorable outcome. Legal professionals assist in drafting compelling appellate briefs and identifying irregularities.

ComponentDetails
Governing LawD.C. Workers’ Compensation Act, D.C. Code § 1-623 et seq.
Reviewing BodyCompensation Review Board → D.C. Court of Appeals
Filing DeadlineWithin 30 days of CRB decision
Typical Grounds for AppealLegal error, procedural defects, lack of substantial evidence
Final OutcomeAffirm, reverse, or remand decision

31 Jul, 2025

The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading or relying on the contents of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship with our firm. For advice regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
Certain informational content on this website may utilize technology-assisted drafting tools and is subject to attorney review.

quick menu
CONTACT US
call center
CLICK TO START YOUR FREE CONSULTATION
CONTACT US
call center