court and its orders as ones that attorneys must obey. (E.g., Gov. Code, §§ 11455.30, subd. (a), 11475.30.) We also disagree with Moriarty’s position that (Review Dept. In the Matter of 2000) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 126 can be read to mean that the only administrative agencies that section 6103 applies to are constitutional administrative agencies, such as the WCAB. In we found that an of [a] workers’ compensation judge is an order of a court within Lantz, “order the meaning of section 6103,” and the attorney violated that section by disregarding such an order. (Id. at p. 134.) We did not make any finding that other, nonconstitutional administrative agencies fell outside section 6103’s scope. Moreover, there are many reasons to apply the same analysis that we used in to Lantz orders issued by the OAH. The Legislature’s creation of workers’ compensation tribunals (namely, the WCAB) and processes and procedures to resolve workers’ compensation disputes (see 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. at p. 134) parallels the purposes of In the Matter of Lantz, supra, the OAH, which is state entity, funded by the state, created to provide adjudicators to decide “a the fate of those faced with deprivations of property and liberty interests in administrative hearings.” (California (1999) 20 Cal.4th 327, 336.) Both Teachers Ass’n v. State of California the OAH and the WCAB are tribunals that adjudicate parties’ contentions and property rights, and both resolve issues of fact and law. Further, final decisions of both the WCAB and other administrative agencies acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity may each have res judicata and collateral estoppel effect. (Hand (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 1204, Rehabilitation Center v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Board 1214 [discussing res judicata and collateral estoppel]; (1983) 34 Traub v. Board of Retirement Cal.3d 793, 798 [discussing collateral estoppel]); (1995) 12 Cal.4th Brosterhous v. State Bar 315, 324 [discussing res judicata and collateral estoppel]; Pacific Coast Medical Enterprises v.
court and its orders as ones that attorneys must obey. (E.g., Gov. Code, §§ 11455.30, subd. (a), 11475.30.) We also disagree with Moriarty’s position that In the Matter of (Review Dept. 2000) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 126 can be read to mean that the only administrative agencies that section 6103 applies to are constitutional administrative agencies, such as the WCAB. In Lantz, we found that an “order of [a] workers’ compensation judge is an order of a court within the meaning of section 6103,” and the attorney violated that section by disregarding such an order. (Id. at p. 134.) We did not make any finding that other, nonconstitutional administrative agencies fell outside section 6103’s scope. Moreover, there are many reasons to apply the same analysis that we used in Lantz to orders issued by the OAH. The Legislature’s creation of workers’ compensation tribunals (namely, the WCAB) and processes and procedures to resolve workers’ compensation disputes (see In the Matter of Lantz, supra, 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. at p. 134) parallels the purposes of the OAH, which is “a state entity, funded by the state, created to provide adjudicators to decide the fate of those faced with deprivations of property and liberty interests in administrative hearings.” (California Teachers Ass’n v. State of California (1999) 20 Cal.4th 327, 336.) Both the OAH and the WCAB are tribunals that adjudicate parties’ contentions and property rights, and both resolve issues of fact and law. Further, final decisions of both the WCAB and other administrative agencies acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity may each have res judicata and collateral estoppel effect. (Hand Rehabilitation Center v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Board (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 1204, 1214 [discussing res judicata and collateral estoppel]; Traub v. Board of Retirement (1983) 34 Cal.3d 793, 798 [discussing collateral estoppel]); Brosterhous v. State Bar (1995) 12 Cal.4th 315, 324 [discussing res judicata and collateral estoppel]; Pacific Coast Medical Enterprises v.
Moriarty_20170420_p.docx