CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, finding removal to be an extraordinary remedy not warranted here. The Board concluded the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be inadequate. Furthermore, the Board found the defendant's oral motion for reassignment untimely, as Labor Code § 5700 generally requires the same judge to conclude proceedings once assigned. The dissenting opinion argued for removal, asserting the defendant's motion for reassignment was timely under WCAB Rule 10453, as they were first notified of the assigned judge at the MSC and no testimony had been taken.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, finding removal to be an extraordinary remedy not warranted here. The Board concluded the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be inadequate. Furthermore, the Board found the defendant's oral motion for reassignment untimely, as Labor Code § 5700 generally requires the same judge to conclude proceedings once assigned. The dissenting opinion argued for removal, asserting the defendant's motion for reassignment was timely under WCAB Rule 10453, as they were first notified of the assigned judge at the MSC and no testimony had been taken.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.