NESTLE USA INC SEDGWICK CMS LUIS MEJIA HERNANDEZ WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIALUIS MEJIA HERNANDEZ, Applicant,vs.NESTLE USA, INC.; SEDGWICK CMS, Defendants.Case No. ADJ9226272(Bakersfield District Office)OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PETITION FORREMOVAL AND DECISIONAFTER REMOVAL Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated June 19, 2014, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered: “Defendant to file and serve Points and Authorities explaining the relevance of each exhibit by 718114.” Defendant contends that the Order violates counsel’s work product privilege and will force counsel to disclose litigation strategy before trial. Applicant has not filed an answer. Applicant, while employed as a maintenance utility worker on August 16, 2013, sustained an industrial injury to his left wrist and hand and claims to have sustained injury to his upper extremities and cervical spine. The case came on for a mandatory settlement conference (MSC) on June 19, 2014. Applicant listed two exhibits and one witness. Defendant listed 47 exhibits and two witnesses. The case was continued to trial. In her Report and Recommendation, the WCJ states that the Order does not infringe upon the attorney’s work product privilege. We agree. However, she also states that since Labor Code section 5802(e)(3)1 does not exclude evidentiary objections, defendant must respond to objections to relevance at the MSC. Parties often list more exhibits and disclose more witnesses than they present at trial. The 1 We assume that this is a typographical error and that the WCJ refers to Labor Code section 5502(d)(3), which requires the filing of a pretrial conference statement, including a listing of exhibits and disclosure of witnesses. , reason for this is to avoid the exclusion of evidence or witnesses not disclosed at the MSC, as required by section 5
