Elisa Willits-spolin vs. Hathaway Children’s Services; california Insurance Guarantee Association (ciga) And Its Servicing Facility Broadspire For California Compensation, In Liquidation

(VNO 0450657)This case involves a petition for removal filed by Defendant Hathaway Children's Services, California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) and its servicing facility Broadspire for California Compensation, in liquidation. The petition was dismissed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board due to it being unverified and not meeting the standards for removal.

Hathaway Children’S Services; California Insurance Guarantee Association (Ciga) And Its Servicing Facility Broadspire For California Compensation, In Liquidation Elisa Willits-Spolin WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAELISA WILLITS-SPOLIN, Applicant,vs.HATHAWAY CHILDREN’S SERVICES; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE UARANTEE ASSOCIATION (CIGA)and its servicing facility BROADSPIRE for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION, in liquidation, Defendant.Case No. ADJ941704 (VNO 0450657)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            Defendant has filed a timely, unverified petition for removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated October 4, 2010. wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered discovery closed and continued the case to trial. Defendant contends that it has been denied due process of law because it has not been served with entire medical billings or the medical reports substantiating those billings; because lien claimant Advanced Orthopedics (Advanced); because there is an appearance of a prohibited assignment of a claim; and because it has not been allowed additional discovery on these issues. We have received an answer from Advanced.            WCAB Rule 10843(b) (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8. § 10843(b)) provides: “The petition for removal and any answer thereto shall be verified upon oath in the manner required for verified pleadings in courts of record ” This petition is not verified, despite the fact that the WCJ noted in his Report and Recommendation that the petition is unverified (see Lucena v Diablo A wo Body (2000) 65 Cal Comp Cases 1425 (significant panel dccisionj). Therefore, we dismiss it. , We note that if we had reached the merits of the petition, we would have denied it for reasons set forth by the WC.I in his Report and Recommendation, which vc adopt and incorporate herein.            Moreover, removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board.(Cone: v Workers Comp.

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.