Darryl Pillors' Industrial Injury Case Against Penske & Old Republic

In this case, Darryl Pillors was employed as a truck driver and claimed industrial injury to his back and shoulder on November 20, 2008 and psychiatric injury through the period ending December 17, 2008. Penske Truck Leasing Co. and Old Republic Insurance Company requested removal of the March 15, 2010 Order issued by the workers compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) wherein the WCJ ordered the Medical Director to produce a second panel of qualified medical evaluators (QME). The Appeals Board granted the removal, rescinded the WCJ's decision, and returned the matters to the trial level for further proceedings and decision by the WCJ. The WCJ must determine the admissibility of the first panel QME report and address the remaining

Penske Truck Leasing Co.; Old Republic Insurance Company Darryl Pillors WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADARRYL PILLORS, Applicant,vs.PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO.; OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ6632043; ADJ6580510OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL            Defendant requests removal regarding the March 15, 2010 Order issued by the workers compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) wherein the WCJ ordered the Medical Director to produce a second panel of qualified medical evaluators (QME) in the specialty of orthopedics and deferred the issue of the admissibility of “that report.” These matters involve applicant’s claims of industrial injury to his back and shoulder on November 20, 2008 (Case No. ADJ 6580510) and psychiatric injury through the period ending December 17, 2008 (Case No. ADJ 6632043) while employed as a truck driver.            Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in ordering the Medical Director to produce a second panel arguing that applicant did not object in a timely manner to the panel QME report of Howard Sturtz. M.D., pursuant to QME Regulation 31.5 (California Code of Regulations, title 8. section 31.5); that applicant did not appeal the WCJ’s January 13. 2010 Order Denying Second Qualified Medical Examination Without Prejudice (Order); that the admissibility of Dr. Sturtz’ November 17. 2009 report has not been adjudicated; and that defendant will suffer significant prejudice or irreparable harm if applicant is allowed to obtain a second panel QME report. ,             Applicant, who is in pro per. did not file an answer. However, the WCJ issued a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny defendant’s            Based on our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below, we will grant defendant’s request for removal, rescind the WCJ’s decision, and return these matters to the trial level for further proceedings and de

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.