Maria Vigil (aka Maria Morgan), vs. County Of Merced Probation Department, Permissibly Self-insured, Administered By Pegasus Risk Management,

In this case, the County of Merced Probation Department, permissibly self-insured and administered by Pegasus Risk Management, filed a Petition to Change Venue to the Fresno District Office. The worker, Maria Vigil (aka Maria Morgan), then filed a Petition for Change of Venue to the Stockton District Office, arguing that her new address was closer to the Stockton District Office than the Fresno District Office, that the claims adjuster was located in Modesto, and that she had a number of cases resolved via stipulated award in the Stockton office which may be the subject of further litigation. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, finding that no good cause was shown to transfer the case back to the Stockton

County Of Merced Probation Department, permissibly self-insured, administered by Pegasus Risk Management, Maria Vigil (Aka Maria Morgan), WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARIA VIGIL (aka MARIA MORGAN),Applicant,vs.COUNTY OF MERCED PROBATION DEPARTMENT, permissibly self-insured, administered by PEGASUS RISK MANAGEMENT,Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ10438517ADJ10590208(Fresno District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            Applicant seeks removal of the Findings of Fact and Order (“Order”) issued by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on January 20, 2017, wherein the WCJ denied applicant’s Petition for Change of Venue to the Stockton District Office. Applicant contends her Petition for Change of Venue should have been granted because she has moved to a location which is closer to the Stockton District Office than the Fresno District Office, because the claims adjuster is located in Modesto, and because applicant has a number of cases resolved via stipulated award in the Stockton office which may be the subject of further litigation.            We received an Answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny removal.            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal, the Answer, and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below, we will deny defendant’s Petition for Removal.FACTUAL BACKGROUND            On June 2, 2016, applicant filed an Application for Adjudication in case number ADJ10438517 at the Stockton District Office, claiming a cumulative trauma injury to her neck, wrist, and shoulders sustained during the period from February 1, 2013 to February 1, 2014 while employed by defendant as a legal process clerk. The application lists the injury as occurring at 2222 M St., Merced, California. , According to the application, applicant was resident a

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.