Brenda Lee, vs. Magic Investment Corporation; cna Claimplus, Inc. For American casualty Company Of Reading, Pennsylvania,

This case involves a dispute between Brenda Lee, the applicant, and Magic Investment Corporation and CNA ClaimPlus, Inc. for American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania, the defendant. The defendant sought removal or reconsideration of the Replacement Panel Order issued by the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) which granted the applicant's Petition for an Order compelling the Medical Unit/Administrative Director to issue a replacement panel number 1028544. The WCJ ordered the Administrative Director to issue a replacement panel number 1028544 to the parties for the specialty of rheumatology (MMR). The defendant argued that due process rights were violated, that the WCJ relied upon false representation by applicant's counsel, and that rheumat

MAGIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION; CNA CLAIMPLUS, INC. for AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, BRENDA LEE, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABRENDA LEE, Applicant,vs.MAGIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION; CNA CLAIMPLUS, INC. for AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, Defendant(s).Case Nos. ADJ380140 (VNO 0526152)ADJ4708827 (VNO 0525557)OPINION AND ORDERSDISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONAND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            Defendant, “CNA ClaimPlus, Inc. for American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania”, seeks removal, or in the alternative, reconsideration of the “Replacement Panel Order Pursuant to 8 CCR § 31.5a[1] and § 31.7b[1]” wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) granted applicant’s Petition for an Order compelling the “Medical Unit/Administrative Director to issue a replacement panel number 1028544”, issued May 11, 2009. The WCJ ordered the Administrative Director to “issue a replacement panel number 1028544 to the parties for the specialty of rheumatology (MMR).”            due process rights were violated because applicant failed to meet the “notice requirements provided pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure”; (2) that the WCJ relied upon the false representation by applicant’s counsel that “defendant requested a panel in rheumatology”; and (3) that rheumatology “is a sub-specialty of internal medicine [and] there is no good reason why an internist cannot give an opinion on the applicant’s current condition.” Applicant filed an Answer.            upon our review of the record, and for the reasons set forth herein, we will dismiss defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration, because there is no order subject to reconsideration, and 26 deny defendant’s Petition for Removal. ,             In the underlying matter, the WCJ issued the Replacement Panel Order on May 11, 2009. Defendant filed its Petition for Removal/Reconsideration on May 21, 2009. On June 2, 2009,within 15 days

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.