CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, treating it as a petition for reconsideration of an order to have the applicant evaluated by an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME) for new and further disability. The Board found that the WCJ had the authority to develop the record by ordering the AME evaluation, especially given the apparent lack of medical evidence for the new claim. Furthermore, the timely filing of the applicant's petition to reopen preserved the Board's jurisdiction, and the defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice warranting removal. The defendant's objection to the AME evaluation cost was deemed standard employer liability.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, treating it as a petition for reconsideration of an order to have the applicant evaluated by an Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME) for new and further disability. The Board found that the WCJ had the authority to develop the record by ordering the AME evaluation, especially given the apparent lack of medical evidence for the new claim. Furthermore, the timely filing of the applicant's petition to reopen preserved the Board's jurisdiction, and the defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice warranting removal. The defendant's objection to the AME evaluation cost was deemed standard employer liability.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.