Manuel Martinez vs. Barrett Business Services, Permissibly Self-insured And Self-administered

In this case, Manuel Martinez, an employee of Barrett Business Services, claimed to have sustained an industrial injury to his upper extremities, trunk, lower extremities and psyche on January 1, 2008. The defendant denied the injury and requested a priority conference on the issue of injury arising out of employment or in the course of employment. The case was taken off calendar for further discovery, but the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found that the applicant had not exercised due diligence in completing discovery and denied due process of law. The Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinded the Order dated June 8, 2011, closed discovery, and returned the case to the trial level to be set for trial.

Barrett Business Services, Permissibly Self-Insured and Self-Administered Manuel Martinez WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMANUEL MARTINEZ, Applicant,vs.BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, Permissibly Self-Insured and Self-Administered, Defendant.Case No. ADJ6810390OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL            Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated June 8, 2011, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered the case off calendar for further discovery. Defendant contends that applicant has not exercised due diligence in completing discovery, as-required by Labor Code section 5502(c)(3) and that defendant has been denied due process of law. Applicant has filed an “Objection for Removal.” We have not received a Report, and Recommendation from the WCJ.            Applicant, while employed as a maintenance worker on January 1, 2008, claims to have sustained an industrial injury to his upper extremities, trunk, lower extremities and psyche. Defendant denied the injury. Defendant filed a declaration of readiness to proceed (DOR) on September 1, 2010, requesting a priority conference on the issue of injury arising out of employment or in the course of employment (AOE/COE). Applicant did not object to the DOR. Therefore, “if applicant’s attorney received a copy of the [DOR] and has not filed an objection … , applicant shall be deemed to have waived any and all objections to proceeding on the issue specified in the declaration, absent extraordinary circumstances.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8. § 10251(d).) The DOR’s proof of service shows service on applicant’s attorney at 14522 Van Owen Street, Suite 3. Van Nuys, CA 91405. Although applicant’s attorney’s objection to defendant’s Petition for Removal reflects a current address of 5924 Van Nuys Boulevard, Van Nuys, CA 91401, the objection does not state that the September

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.