In this case, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant’s petition for reconsideration and affirmed the decision, except that the finding of fact number 6 and order number 2 were deleted from the decision, striking all reference to the defendant being liable for the costs of Dr. Burt’s medical-legal reporting.
AXIUM ENTERTAINMENT, CIGA by its servicing facility, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES for CREDIT GENERAL in liquidation; 20th CENTRUARY FOX, NATIONAL UNION INS. CO. administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, KIMBERLY SMITH, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAKIMBERLY SMITH, Applicant,vs.AXIUM ENTERTAINMENT, CIGA by its servicing facility, INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES for CREDIT GENERAL in liquidation; 20th CENTRUARY FOX, NATIONAL …
(FRE 0220936) is a case in which the defendant, California Indemnity Insurance Company, sought both reconsideration and removal with regard to a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (“WCJ”) handwritten order of March 18, 2009 denying California Indemnity’s petition to dismiss the case. The WCJ’s order was denied due to the unclear status of the settlement and the questionable dismissal of liens. The petition for reconsideration was dismissed because it was not taken from a final order subject to reconsideration, and the petition for removal was denied because California Indemnity had not shown the requisite substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted.
In this case, Melanie Medbery was employed as a manager at Payless Shoe Source, Inc. On August 28, 2005, she sustained an industrial injury to her right knee and right lower extremity. Payless Shoe Source, Inc. then terminated her on or about September 21, 2005, in violation of Labor Code section 132a. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, finding that Payless Shoe Source, Inc. had not provided adequate notice of the termination and that the termination was a form of discrimination.
In this case, Good Shepherd Convalescent Hospital and the State Compensation Insurance Fund were defendants in a workers’ compensation case brought by Cecilia Macias. Wilshire Surgicenter, the lien claimant, sought reconsideration of and removal from an order disallowing its $18,148 lien claim for medical treatment it provided to Macias for admitted industrial injuries. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the reconsideration and removal, finding that Wilshire had not proven that its lien claim was reasonable.
(SDO0330178) is a case involving the City of Los Angeles Fire Department and William Lowe (deceased) and Darlene Lowe, the applicant. The defendant filed a petition for removal, requesting that the appeals board rescind the Order for Parties to Develop the Record dated March 24, 2009. The petition was denied as the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The court also recommended that the parties address the issue of whether the cancer condition developed within the requisite time frame as defined in Labor Code section 3212.1(b).
This case is about Dien Le, an employee of HMR USA, Inc., who sustained an industrial injury to his back and psyche on March 20, 2001. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues. The WCJ found that Le had worked for the employer for six months, and thus the provisions of Labor Code section 3208.3 did not apply. The WCJ also found that Le had sustained permanent disability of 70%, based on the range of evidence. The defendant sought reconsideration, contending that Le’s claim of psychiatric injury was barred by the six-month employment requirement of Labor Code section 3208.3(d), and that the WCJ erred in basing her finding
In this case, Deborah Gross (Butler) was seeking workers’ compensation for three separate industrial injuries to her neck, back, and shoulder. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied her petition for reconsideration and dismissed the defendant’s petition for reconsideration. The defendant, The Boeing Company, had not filed a verified petition and was not currently aggrieved. The Board found that the Workers’ Compensation Administrative Law Judge had correctly found that Gross had sustained the injuries and was entitled to compensation.
, ALVARADO MANUFACTURING COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, JESUS CHAVEZ, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIA: This case involves a dispute between Jesus Chavez, the applicant, and Alvarado Manufacturing Company and the State Compensation Insurance Fund, the defendants. The applicant was found to have sustained industrial injuries to his lumbar spine, causing permanent disability of 6% in ADJ4086512 and 24% in ADJ2551086. The WCJ found that the defendant did not carry its burden of proof with regard to the issue of apportionment to non-industrial factors. The WCAB granted reconsider
is a case in which Loma Linda University Health Care, a permissibly self-insured defendant, filed a petition for removal to rescind an order from a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) that required the defendant to pay the applicant’s attorney an attorney fee of $1425.00 for the December 22, 2008, deposition of the applicant. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for removal and granted the petition for reconsideration, rescinding the WCJ’s order and returning the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.
