Home/Case Law/SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA
Regular DecisionRemoval Petition

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA

Filed: Jul 21, 2010
San Francisco
ADJ2154380

CompFox AI Summary

In this case, the defendant sought to disqualify a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) due to their alleged unavailability for deposition within 120 days as required by Administrative Director Rule 35.5(f). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for removal. The WCAB found that Rule 31.5, which allows for replacement panels, does not apply to QME unavailability for deposition. Furthermore, the Board determined the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, especially after rescheduling the deposition themselves.

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA 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

In this case, the defendant sought to disqualify a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) due to their alleged unavailability for deposition within 120 days as required by Administrative Director Rule 35.5(f). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for removal. The WCAB found that Rule 31.5, which allows for replacement panels, does not apply to QME unavailability for deposition. Furthermore, the Board determined the defendant failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, especially after rescheduling the deposition themselves.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA workers compensation case in San Francisco. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA case law summary from San Francisco. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA Case Analysis

SPENCER DAVIS vs. CLARK & SULLIVAN, INC., LWP CLAIMS SACRAMENTO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SAN FRANCISCO, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY PASADENA is a legal case related to workers' compensation in San Francisco. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.