CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, finding the WCJ erred in denying a QME panel request. This denial was based on Administrative Director Rule 30(d)(3), which previously stated only the employee could request a QME panel after a total denial of injury. However, the Board's recent en banc decision in Mendoza v. Huntington Hospital invalidated this rule as conflicting with Labor Code sections 4060(c) and 4062.2, which allow either party to request a QME panel. Therefore, the prior order was rescinded, and the matter returned to the trial level with instructions to issue a QME panel.
KAI CHRISTOPHER vs. TIME WARNER CABLE, ESIS is a workers' compensation case decided in San Francisco. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in San Francisco.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, finding the WCJ erred in denying a QME panel request. This denial was based on Administrative Director Rule 30(d)(3), which previously stated only the employee could request a QME panel after a total denial of injury. However, the Board's recent en banc decision in Mendoza v. Huntington Hospital invalidated this rule as conflicting with Labor Code sections 4060(c) and 4062.2, which allow either party to request a QME panel. Therefore, the prior order was rescinded, and the matter returned to the trial level with instructions to issue a QME panel.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.