News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

Benjamin Morales vs. Western Tube & Conduit Mitsui Sumitomo

WESTERN TUBE & CONDUIT MITSUI SUMITOMO BENJAMIN MORALES WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABENJAMIN MORALES, Applicant,vs.WESTERN TUBE & CONDUIT;MITSUI SUMITOMO, Defendants.Case No. ADJ6818414(Los Angeles District Office)OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PETITION FORREMOVAL AND DECISIONAFTER REMOVAL            Applicant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated April 22, 2014, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) continued this matter to trial on June 2, 2014, and closed discovery. Applicant contends that the case should not have been set for trial on all issues because his condition is not yet permanent and stationary and because defendant has not authorized a consultation by a cardiologist and other medical treatment recommended by the primary treating physician. Defendant has not filed an answer.1 Apparently, the hearing on June 2, 2014, was taken off calendar pending the disposition of this petition.            Applicant, while employed as a lead man/machine operator from May 1, 1979, through June 16, 2008, sustained an industrial injury to his left shoulder and claims to have sustained injury to multiple additional body parts, including the sequelae of a stroke he claims to have sustained while at work. He has been evaluated by Mark Silver, M.D., as qualified medical evaluator (QME). Otherwise, he appears to be self-procuring medical treatment. There are twenty liens.            Applicant’s primary concern appears to be a consultation with a cardiology specialist recommended by Nick Mashour, M.D., a “secondary treater in internal medicine.” It appears that the 1 It appears that two insurance companies have been joined as parties in this matter: Mitsui Sumitomo and Insurance Company of the West. It is not clear whether both are still active participants, and it is not clear to which “Defendant” applicant refers. , cardiology consult is required as part of ev


Join our community and never miss an update. Stay connected with cutting-edge insights and valuable resources.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *