Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Luzadas: A Duress Challenge to a Compromise and Release Requires a Trial Record

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 15, 2026

Candy Luzadas sought reconsideration of an order approving a compromise and release, asserting that she signed the settlement under duress. The Appeals Board treated the filing according to the relief actually requested and focused on whether a trial record existed for that challenge.

The settlement had already been approved

The workers’ compensation judge approved the compromise and release on June 18, 2026. Luzadas then asked the Appeals Board to undo the result because, she alleged, her agreement was produced by duress.

The asserted issue had not been tried

No hearing had occurred on the facts surrounding execution of the settlement. The Board explained that a decision must rest on admitted evidence and that the worker bore the burden of proving the ground asserted for setting the agreement aside.

Reconsideration was not yet the proper merits vehicle

Because the duress claim had not been adjudicated, the Board dismissed the reconsideration petition as unripe. It returned the matter so the trial judge could treat the filing as a petition to set aside the compromise and release and conduct a hearing.

The order preserved later review

After the trial judge decides the set-aside petition on a developed record, an aggrieved party may seek reconsideration of that decision. The opinion did not decide whether duress existed or whether the settlement should ultimately be rescinded.

Key takeaways

• Identify the exact ground for setting aside the settlement.
• Submit declarations, communications, and testimony supporting that ground.
• Request a hearing when material facts are disputed.
• Distinguish an untried set-aside claim from reconsideration of a merits decision.