CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal. The defendant argued the case should not have been taken off calendar for a re-evaluation with an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME), but proceeded to trial on new and further disability. The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denying removal, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The decision relied on the WCJ's report, which concluded that a re-evaluation by the AME was appropriate under Labor Code §4067, and that a medical report is not a prerequisite to filing a petition to reopen.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal. The defendant argued the case should not have been taken off calendar for a re-evaluation with an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME), but proceeded to trial on new and further disability. The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denying removal, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy. The decision relied on the WCJ's report, which concluded that a re-evaluation by the AME was appropriate under Labor Code §4067, and that a medical report is not a prerequisite to filing a petition to reopen.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.