AURELIO ROSALES vs. GIUMARRA VINEYARDS CORPORATION; ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY

In this case, Aurelio Rosales filed a petition for reconsideration and removal against Giumarra Vineyards Corporation and Arrowood Indemnity Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied removal, as the petition was not a "final" order and did not determine any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case. The Board also denied removal as petitioner had not shown that there would be substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was not granted.

GIUMARRA VINEYARDS CORPORATION; ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY AURELIO ROSALES WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAAURELIO ROSALES, Applicant,vs.GIUMARRA VINEYARDS CORPORATION; ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ2704842 (VNO 0496917)ADJ3804892 (VNO 0496918)(Bakersfield District Office)ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING REMOVAL            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration, and we have reviewed the record in this matter.            A petition for reconsideration is properly taken only from a “final” order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5902, 5903.) A “final” order has been defined as one “which determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case.” (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 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].) Interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions, entered in the midst of the workers’ compensation proceedings, are not considered to be “final” orders because they do not determine any substantive question. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 655]; Rymer, supra, 211 Cal.App.3d 1180; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (Kramer), supra, 82 Cal.App.3d 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 665]; see also, e.g., 2 Cal. Workers’ Comp. Practice (Cont.Ed.Bar 4th ed. 2000) §§ 21.8, 21.9.) Pre-trial orders regarding evidence, discovery, trial setting, venue, or similar issues are non-final interlocutory orders that do not determine any substantive right of the parties. Accordingly, the petition, to the extentit seeks reconsideration, must be dismissed. (E.g., Elwood v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 272 (writ den.); Jablonski v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1987) 52 Cal.Comp.Cases 399 (writ den.); Beck v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1979) 44 Cal

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.