WPI155.03Burden of Proof
6A WAPRAC WPI 155.03Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
6A Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 155.03 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
July 2019 Update
Part XI. Workers' Compensation
Chapter 155. Workers' Compensation
WPI 155.03 Burden of Proof
The findings and decision of the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals are presumed correct. This presumption is rebuttable, and it is for you to determine whether it is rebutted by the evidence. The burden of proof is on(name of appellant)to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the decision is incorrect.
When it is said that a party has the burden of proof on any proposition, or that any proposition must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence, or the expression “if you find” is used, it means that you must be persuaded, considering all the evidence in the case [bearing on the question], that the proposition on which that party has the burden of proof is more probably true than not true.
NOTE ON USE
This instruction should be given in every case. The last paragraph is the same as WPI 21.01 (Meaning of Burden of Proof—Preponderance of the Evidence).
RCW 51.52.115 provides that the board's findings and decision shall be “prima facie” correct. This was interpreted to mean that there is a presumption on appeal that the findings and decision are correct until the trier of fact determines they are incorrect by a preponderance of the evidence. Allison v. Department of Labor and Industries, 66 Wn.2d 263, 401 P.2d 982 (1965). See also McClelland v. ITT Rayonier, Inc., 65 Wn.App. 386, 828 P.2d 1138 (1992), and Belnap v. Boeing Company, 64 Wn.App. 212, 823 P.2d 528 (1992). The court in Harrison Mem'l Hosp. v. Gagnon, 110 Wn.App. 475, 40 P.3d 1221 (2002), affirmed the principle that when the claimant has prevailed before the Board, the claimant does not carry an additional burden of proof before the superior court, and that the burden of proof is solely on the appealing party.
In an employer's appeal, the court held that the burden of proving that a decision of the board is erroneous is sustained by demonstrating that there is not enough evidence to support it. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Department of Labor and Industries, 43 Wn.2d 584, 262 P.2d 536 (1953).
[Current as of November 2016.]
Westlaw. © 2019 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
|End of Document||© 2020 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.|