Monica Lopez, vs. State Compensation Insurance Fund; Administered By Acclamation Insurance Management,

In this case, Monica Lopez is appealing to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board to remove the State Compensation Insurance Fund, administered by Acclamation Insurance Management. The Board denied the petition for removal, stating that removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised and that the petitioner must demonstrate that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. The Board concluded that, based on the analysis of the merits of the petitioner's arguments, removal was not necessary.

State Compensation Insurance Fund; administered by Acclamation Insurance Management, Monica Lopez, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMONICA LOPEZ,Applicant,vs.STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND; administered by ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT,Defendants.Case No. ADJ8195812(Los Angeles District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits of petitioner’s arguments in the WCJ’s report, we will deny removal.            Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 600, fn. 5 (71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155, 157, fn. 5]; Kleemann v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 281, fn. 2 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 133, 136, fn. 2].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner ultimately issues. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843(a).) Here, based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits of petitioner’s arguments, we are not persuaded that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is denied and/or that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if the matter ultimately proceeds to a final decision adverse to petitioner.////// ,             For the foregoing reasons,            IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Removal is DENIED.        WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD        ____________________________________________        JOSÉ H. RAZOI CONCU

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.