Gary D. Davis, Inc.; State Compensation Insurance Fund, Glenwood Kirby Buschman, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGLENWOOD KIRBY BUSCHMAN,Applicant,vs.GARY D. DAVIS, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND,Defendants.Case No. ADJ2957106 (VNO 0541600)(Santa Rosa District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REMOVAL Applicant Glenwood Kirby Buschman, in pro per, filed a letter dated October 11, 2016, which we will treat as a Petition for Removal in response to our Opinion and Order Dismissing Petition for Reconsideration and Denying Petition for Removal (Order) issued on August 12, 2016. Applicant contends that he suffered significant prejudice and/or irreparable harm in support of his request for change of venue, which was the subject of his previous Petition for Reconsideration. Specifically, applicant contends that the actions of defense attorney Heather L. Nicoll and claims adjuster Adrian Beckham caused him prejudice and/or irreparable harm because they prevented him from receiving the appropriate medical treatment and they stopped sending him disability payments. We did not receive an answer from defendant State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF). We have reviewed the record and considered the allegations of the Petition. Based on our review of the record, and as discussed below, as well as discussed in our previous Opinion, which we adopt and incorporate herein, we dismiss the Petition for Removal.I. On September 5, 2006, while working for defendant Gary D. Davis, Inc. as a drywall finisher, applicant fell off the second floor of a house and felt immediate pain in his neck, right hand, right hip, right femur, and right knee. (February 2, 2007 QME Report by Robert L. Homer, M.D., p. 2.) On May 5, 2016, applicant filed a Petition for Change of Venue requesting that the venue be changed from Santa Rosa to San Francisco because “over excess amount of time spend for su
Glenwood Kirby Buschman, vs. Gary D. Davis, Inc.; State Compensation Insurance Fund,
In this case, Glenwood Kirby Buschman filed a Petition for Removal in response to an Opinion and Order Dismissing Petition for Reconsideration and Denying Petition for Removal issued on August 12, 2016. The Petition for Removal was dismissed because Buschman failed to show significant prejudice and/or irreparable harm from the WCJ's order denying change of venue. The Petition for Removal was also dismissed as untimely and impermissibly successive.
- Filed On:
- Court: California, Santa Rosa
- Case No. ADJ2957106
To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days
Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!
Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.