Ana Ochoa, vs. Malibu Colony Maids, Inc., ,

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration and denied the Petition for Removal filed by Ana Ochoa against Malibu Colony Maids, Inc. The Board found that the decision of the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge was an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue and not a "final" order, and that the petitioner had not demonstrated that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result if removal was denied.

Malibu Colony Maids, Inc., , Ana Ochoa, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAANAOCHOA,Applicant,vs.MALIBU COLONY MAIDS, INC., ,Case No. ADJ9319071(Marina del Rey District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVALDefendant.Case No. ADJ9319071(Marina del Rey District Office)            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and Removal and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. 1 Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in the WCJ’s report, which we adopt and incorporate, we will dismiss the petition to the extent it seeks reconsideration and deny it to the extent it seeks removal.            A petition for reconsideration may only be taken from a “final” order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5902, 5903.) A “final” order has been defined as one that either “determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case” (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1180; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 534-535 [45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410, 413]; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 39, 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661, 665]) or determines a “threshold” issue that is fundamental to the claim for benefits. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1070, 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 650-651, 655-656].) Interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions, entered in the midst of the workers’ compensation proceedings, are not considered “final” orders. (Maranian, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases at p. 655] (“interim 1 Commissioner Sweeney, who was on the panel that issued a prior decision in this matter is unavailable to participate further in this decision. Another panel member was assigned in her place. , orders, which

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.