CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration and dismissed removal in the case of Ninfa Quintero vs. Pacific Triple E. Ltd. The denial was based on the reasoning provided by the workers' compensation administrative law judge, which the Board adopted. The judge correctly found that defense counsel violated Labor Code section 4062.3 by communicating with a medical evaluator and providing documentation less than 20 days prior to the scheduled evaluation, and by failing to serve applicant's counsel with all enclosed documents. The Board further agreed that striking the evaluator's report and ordering a new panel was appropriate, as there was no showing of irreparable harm or significant prejudice to warrant removal.
NINFA QUINTERO vs. PACIFIC TRIPLE E. LTD., MEADOWBROOK FOR STAR INSURANCE COMPANY 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 Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration and dismissed removal in the case of Ninfa Quintero vs. Pacific Triple E. Ltd. The denial was based on the reasoning provided by the workers' compensation administrative law judge, which the Board adopted. The judge correctly found that defense counsel violated Labor Code section 4062.3 by communicating with a medical evaluator and providing documentation less than 20 days prior to the scheduled evaluation, and by failing to serve applicant's counsel with all enclosed documents. The Board further agreed that striking the evaluator's report and ordering a new panel was appropriate, as there was no showing of irreparable harm or significant prejudice to warrant removal.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.