Janet Parker vs. Costco Wholesale And Sedgwick Claims Management Services

is a case in which Janet Parker is suing Costco Wholesale and Sedgwick Claims Management Services. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, amending the Order Limiting Subpoenaes Duces Tecum to include records regarding the applicant's back, neck, spine, and left knee. The parties were also given twenty days to come to an informal agreement as to the scope of subpoenas relating to other medical conditions. If the parties cannot agree, the defendant may file a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed on this issue.

COSTCO WHOLESALE and SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES JANET PARKER WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJANET PARKER, Applicant,vs.COSTCO WHOLESALE and SEDGWICKCLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7006877(Oakland District Office)OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PETITION FORREMOVAL AND DECISIONAFTER REMOVAL            Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board amend the Order Limiting Subpoenaes Duces Tecum dated April 30, 2014, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered in relevant part: “[D]efendant’s Subpoena Duces Tecum to Sutter Regional Medical Foundation and Bay Spine Medical Associates are limited to records regarding applicant’s back, neck, and spine. Any other records are excluded from subpoenas and shall not be produced.”            Defendant contends that applicant has alleged injury to her spine and left knee, and that defendant is entitled to records of treatment of the left knee. Further, defendant contends there are other records that may impact applicant’s symptoms, such as records of treatment for hernia, pain syndrome, arthritis, and obesity. Defendant concludes: “Defense counsel is willing to meet and confer with applicant’s counsel to try to resolve this issue by crafting an agreed limitation to the scope of the subpoenas which ensures that all relevant records are produced, but applicant’s privacy is protected with regard to records regarding medical conditions or treatment which have no impact on the claimed injuries” (page 3).            Applicant has filed an Answer. Applicant does not object to modifying the Order to allow discovery of records regarding the left knee. Applicant also states that defense counsel is “more than welcome to communicate with applicant’s counsel to discuss different language for the subpoenas that accommodates both applicant’s privacy rights and defendants’ discovery rights” (page 2). ,             In his

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.