CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns a dispute over the deposition of Dr. Michael Kasman, who began an evaluation of the applicant but never completed it. The applicant sought to quash the deposition notice, citing due process, privacy, attorney work product, and the fact that Dr. Kasman was withdrawn as their expert. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal solely to limit the scope of the deposition. The Board amended the discovery order to clarify that Dr. Kasman can only be deposed as a percipient witness regarding his attempted examination, not as a medical expert.
SANDI ODA vs. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT is a workers' compensation case decided in . 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 .
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns a dispute over the deposition of Dr. Michael Kasman, who began an evaluation of the applicant but never completed it. The applicant sought to quash the deposition notice, citing due process, privacy, attorney work product, and the fact that Dr. Kasman was withdrawn as their expert. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal solely to limit the scope of the deposition. The Board amended the discovery order to clarify that Dr. Kasman can only be deposed as a percipient witness regarding his attempted examination, not as a medical expert.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.