Diane Melendez vs. Warner Bros Studios Permissibly Self-insured

This case involves a petition for reconsideration and removal filed by Diane Melendez against Warner Bros Studios, a permissibly self-insured defendant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the allegations of the petition and determined that it was not a "final" order and thus could not be reconsidered. The petition for removal was also denied due to the lack of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The petition was dismissed and removal was denied.

WARNER BROS STUDIOS Permissibly Self-Insured DIANE MELENDEZ WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADIANE MELENDEZ, Applicant,vs.WARNER BROS STUDIOS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendants.Case No. ADJ3166905 (LBO 0396772)ORDER DISMISSINGPETITION FORRECONSIDERATIONAND 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 no; determine any substantive right of the parties. Accordingly, the petition, to the extent it 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.Comp.Cases 190 (writ den.).) ,             To the extent that the petition seek

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.