public right to challenge a fraudulent worker's compensation insurance claim in this case mr poco pepper made representations that he had difficulty lifting his arms above his head walking a couple  blocks even getting out of bed in the morning when all the while he was sparring with professional mixed martial arts fighters running long distance races and making a tape to audition for survivor where he was touting his physical prowess and the district court dismissed this case on procedural grounds under a labor code provision section fifty nine zero one which the district court found imposes a exhaustion requirement before this lawsuit could be brought this record misinterpreted that statute it simply makes no sense to impose an exhausting requirement where the panel that would be reviewing would have absolutely no impact whatsoever on whether the claim go forward the legislature specifically intended that these key tam lawsuits be brought in civil courts and specifically laid out the basis for such claims which can be based solely on the attempt to looks like the owls a yacht a case was decided after the district court issued its decision in the present case yes your honor and the district court therefore didn't have the benefit of that decision when it issued its order kind of curious so and whether you know why the district court did not address monterey mushrooms versus thompson was that discussed it honor is that the is that the district court was looking at this solely based on section fifty nine zero one which is kind of out of context of which is really at the end of the process for when you're allowed to challenge an order and a petition for review wasn't really he was citing at the beginning sort of his background exclusivity rules but he wasn't really the siding on that issue so i think if he had really dug into that in civil courts and the language of human and even if you look at the language of sex in section fifty nine zero one on its own it clearly doesn't apply it says or prohibits the accrual of a cause of action that arises out of a of a final workers compensation order and this action doesn't arise out of a final worker's compensation order it arises out of mr culpepper's dishonesty and seeking his workers compensation benefits where the issues of injury were litigated by t a g that hired lawyers they were able to investigate his claim they entered into a settlement settlement was approved by the judge in this case as judge carney would point out the key ten case was because mr awls it was not seeking any individual damages he wasn't seeking payments to be refunded he wasn't seeking anything other than the civil penalties here however we have t compensation action under the harris case case excuse me cited in our brief the allocation of attorney fees are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the workers compensation appeals court the order in this case was silent in the underlying worker's comp case was silent as to attorney fees for the american role each charge each side there is its own attorney fees where the agreement judgment or contract is silent as to attorney fees they are now asking the district court to reallocate attorney fees in that which is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the house for granted some monitoring mushroom versus tom's very easily your honor   seems like they held that i pay falls outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the workers compensation appeals board and i'm just i haven't didn't see in your briefing i didn't see any real articulation or distinction between those cases and the present case and i'm just trying to figure out what the basis of any to conclude that and i ask a claim seems to clearly fall outside the board broad pattern of conduct which their religion in their time at so you are out of the broad quote pattern of conduct monnerie mushroom was referring to was a concerted scheme by chiropractors to submit hundreds of workers compensation claims they had workers compensation claim over here that might have had to chiropractic we have a couple here and a couple here so the workers compensation board isn't going to see that ste allows them to see the broad scheme here in essence the you can't see the forest for the trees here we only have one tree we have brad culpepper and t g who litigated the case they're claiming fraud in that case their burden of proof in the fraud case the key ten case would require them to show that mr culpepper was not  disabled because under the wilson case they have to show cause a connection between the false statement and the claim itself they would have to prove he wasn't disabled they prove he didn't lose wages prove that his  was not i was out doing things contrary to the disability decision your honor and that's certainly something that we vigorously deny what we don't have before the court  what mr culpepper did with his hundred seventy five thousand dollars one of the reasons why the judgment sought by t h c would undermine the workers compensation system is it would deter a claimant who gets and let's say he has a bad back i want to take that money and fix my back so i can go play golf or something this type of action by them or they can say well now you can play golf mr mitchell or you that after i went and use that money to fix was fully litigated by the parties here too if we're going to allow the insurance company to cherry pick subjective statements made during the course of a worker's compensation case and say that  now fraudulent we're going to completely undermine the worker's compensation system so in your view what is the purpose of the i b i f p a the purpose of the i p a is to combat workers compensation from one hundred percent i agree with that statement of his main teach it to reggie's point our position is that fifty nine zero one requires that determination of fraud to be made in the worker's compensation out of the workers compensation board when the allegedly fraudulent statements were made and i'm just how can that present action arising out of the order of the workman's ok they were made as part of the claim the workers composition claims you can't say take one cherry pick statement that i was that under the penal code as a false statement they have to prove under wilson that the entire claim was false seeking to make determinations of fact as to mr copas fraud during the workers compensation case and although it wouldn't specifically address the damages the underlying issues of disability was mr culpepper disabled he said i can't crouch well now we can crouch because he's done certain things to make himself better let's not forget he was nine years in the n f l this is a superior athlete they are trying to take these things he's done out of context the workers compensation board is much better equipped to decide issues of disability disability and whether or not he wasn't of an employee versus an employer here we have an employer's insurance company filing a case against an employee for allegedly for all false statements made during the course of the workers compensation case  that is where the pickle into analysis comes in does mr culpepper's injuries arise out of that absolutely does mr cole peppers allegedly fraudulent acts satisfy the subject to determination by the workers compensation appeals board not a civil jury civil jury is going to see things taken out of context by t i g u n will be able to do that  culpepper shouldn't be required to relive again issues already litigated in the worker's compensation case this type of action would undermine the worker five years down the line and it seems that there might be some confusion as to whether the key time action creates conquering jurisdiction over this type of quite i would contend that workers compensation issues such as here if the conti case is applicable and this is exclusive there is no conquering jetter just action this is exclusively an issue that should be decided in front of  and points out that it doesn't apply because these claims were made in the legislation made there were meant to be brought in the civil court and i think if you look at the conti it it comes out with a multi part test of how you establish workers compensation access city and in that case they had to go we through a lot of claims to determine which kinds were and which kinds weren't but i think if you get to the end of that test the one exception to workers compensation exclusivity is  or where the motive behind these acts does not violate a fundamental policy of the state and that's where just because it just doesn't apply where the legislature has created a specific claim designed to go for to go forth in the civil courts that is a stablish ing the important fundamental policy of the state and i would like to point out that these weren't you know minor misrepresentations here and it we said in our complaint mr culpepper acknowledged  deposition in this case that he he would he said he was never disabled and that's evidence by the fact that he's running half marathons and kickboxing and got a black belt and this is exactly the kind of case  accomplished by the workers by c i ga or the the qualified medical centers they would have had to go out and follow mr culpepper around because he told i mean these are these a mystical because of counsel is correct and this were  surveillance and take movies but your honor if there was surveillance in every worker's compensation case people's work and compensation premiums would go through the roof i mean the whole the you have to sit i mean a whole list of things he can do i asked him a bunch of questions you had your qualified medical examiners you could examine them and if his physical condition was not consistent with his claims you can certainly do surveillance of what you're doing but your honor he's he's claiming we're not we're not contesting that he necessarily didn't have any injuries i think mr culpepper's argument seems to be if you have any kind of injury at all you can walk into the worker's compensation system you can exaggerate given you know  this i can't get out of bed i can't walk down the street i can't pick up my groceries and you know if they're qualified no centers have to have to believe that unless they're going to go out and follow him around it why can't you go settlement there was no litigation whatsoever about whether or not he was actually disabled or not but the point the point is that the i have p a a ten actions are set up for important purpose that the government doesn't have the resources to investigate all cases of insurance fraud so when these kind of cases are discovered they they need to be brought and when the law is not news why wasn't discovered in the w c b proceeding and you say because he lied to us but why did the insurer say we're not going to accept your lies we're going to do some investigation and i know only answer can give your honor is there are thousands hundreds of thousands of workers compensation claims that come through the system every year and the reason you have these laws is to deter exactly what happened here and not to require the workers compensation system than to go out and do their own independent investigations on every