CHRISTINA VAN DYK, vs. LOCKHEED; ESIS CHATSWORTH,

This case involves Christina Van Dyk, who is not represented by an attorney, filing a petition for removal to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The petition requests that the appeals board rescind the Order Compelling Applicant's Attendance at Medical Evaluation dated May 19, 2009, and the Order to Suspend Proceedings and Bar Compensation dated July 30, 2009. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for removal and rescinded the Order to Suspend Proceedings and Bar Compensation without prejudice, returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings to reconstruct the WCAB file, if necessary, receive the documents necessary to decide the issues presently unresolved, and for such further proceedings and decisions by the WCJ as may be necessary.

LOCKHEED; ESIS CHATSWORTH, CHRISTINA VAN DYK, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACHRISTINA VAN DYK, Applicant,vs.LOCKHEED; ESIS CHATSWORTH, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ3121481OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL            Applicant, who is not represented by an attorney, has filed a timely, apparently unverified petition for removal, requesting that the appeals board rescind the Order Compelling Applicant’s Attendance at Medical Evaluation dated May 19, 2009, and the Order to Suspend Proceedings and Bar Compensation dated July 30, 2009.1 Applicant alleges numerous procedural errors. We have 17 received an answer from defendant.            In his Report and Recommendation, the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) notes that the paper copy of the WCAB file appears to have been lost and that only a few documents have been scanned into EAMS (page 2). He states: “[H]cre we are, 10 years post accident and we still have disputes. We don’t know on what basis the Medical Unit provided a second panel. We don’t know what treatment, if any, is needed. We do not know which state, if any, benefits should be provided in. We don’t even know if the case in chief has been resolved. Nor does the record reflect the full and complete positions of both sides. The entire file should be re-constructed because of the foregoing” (page 6). He recommends that removal be granted and that the case be assigned to a specific WCJ to reconstruct the file, confer with the parties to 1Applicant also requests that we rescind defendant’s Petition to Suspend Proceedings dated July 16, 2009, but we have no power to do that. , determine exactly what issues need to be resolved, and decide those-issues promptly based upon evidence either presently in the file or to be submitted.            We concur. Because the file before us does not contain any of the documents necessary to decide the merits of applicant’s petition, we grant applicant

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.