CompFox AI Summary
The defendant sought removal of a WCJ's finding that an orthopedic QME was not authorized to select an internal medicine QME, arguing Administrative Director Rule 32 permitted it. The Appeals Board denied the petition for removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to demonstrate. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and concluded reconsideration would be an adequate remedy.
RAY WRIGHT vs. MITCHELL CONCRETE, APPLIED RISK OMAHA 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 defendant sought removal of a WCJ's finding that an orthopedic QME was not authorized to select an internal medicine QME, arguing Administrative Director Rule 32 permitted it. The Appeals Board denied the petition for removal. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to demonstrate. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and concluded reconsideration would be an adequate remedy.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.