Maria Navarro vs. Staff Chex; Aig Insurance, Administered By Srs

In this case, Maria Navarro sought reconsideration of a June 1, 2010 Findings and Award, wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that she sustained an industrial injury on June 26, 2008 to her back and right hip that caused 3% permanent disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the June 1, 2010 Findings and Award, and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings and a new decision. The Board found that Navarro may not have received due process because she was not served with the recommended rating from the disability evaluation unit (DEU) and did not have an opportunity to cross-examine the DEU rater. The Board ordered that the

Staff Chex; Aig Insurance, Administered By Srs Maria Navarro WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARIA NAVARRO, Applicant,vs.STAFF CHEX; AIG INSURANCE,b administered by SRS, Defendant(s) Case No. ADJ6712588OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Applicant seeks reconsideration of the June 1, 2010 Findings and Award, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the applicant sustained an industrial injury on June 26, 2008 to her back and right hip that caused 3% permanent disability.            Applicant contends, in essence, that she was denied due process because applicant was never served with the recommended rating from the disability evaluation unit (DEU) and. accordingly, did not have an opportunity to cross-examine the DEU rater.            We have considered applicant’s petition for reconsideration. Defendant did not file «n answer. The WCJ has filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition foT Reconsideration (Report), recommending that reconsideration be denied.            For the reasons discussed below, we will grant reconsideration, rescind the June 1, 2010 Findings and Award, and return this matter to the WCJ for further proceedings and a new decision.            We reviewed the file, which is maintained only in the Electronic Adjudication Management System             (EAMS). The documents that are pan of the record of proceedings arc maintained in the adjudication (ADJ) portion of EAMS. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8. §10751.) The ADJ portion of EAMS docs not contain a formal rating or a proof of service showing that a formal rating was served on all parties. ,             Documents that aie not part of the record of proceedings may be maintained in other portions of EAMS. From reviewing the DEU portion of EAMS. it appears that the DEU prepared a rating on April 5, 2010 and may have served it on the parties. However, we were unable to locate a proof of servic

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.