Pedro Mckay, vs. City Of Riverside, Permissibly Self-insured And Self Administered,

is a case in which the defendant, City of Riverside, sought removal/reconsideration of an order denying its motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration, as there was no order subject to reconsideration, and denied the petition for removal, as the defendant failed to establish that the order would result in significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE, Permissibly Self-Insured and Self Administered, PEDRO MCKAY, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAPEDRO MCKAY, Applicant,vs.CITY OF RIVERSIDE, Permissibly Self- Insured and Self Administered, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ6543064 OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            Defendant seeks “Removal/Reconsideration” of the Order Denying Motion to Quash issued April 22, 2009, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) denied defendant’s Motion to Quash the subpoena duces tecum seeking records. The WCJ noted in the order that defendant’s motion was “defective in that it is incomplete as to the complained of document being attached as an exhibit for review and consideration.” The WCJ continued: Defendant is notified that venue in this matter has been elected by the applicant as Los Angeles and any further filings should be directed to the Los Angeles office so as to expedite handling of matters for the parties.”            Defendant contends that the WCJ erred by issuing the Order Denying Motion to Quash without providing defendant “notice or the opportunity to be heard on the issue of venue.”            In the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal/Reconsideration (Report), the WCJ noted that defendant’s initial motion to quash “did not contain the offending subpoena” and was therefore denied. We note that the Order Denying Motion to Quash did not rule on the issue of venue. Therefore, defendant is free to pursue a change of venue which may be heard at the trial level by the WCJ. ,             Consequently, for the reasons set forth below, we will dismiss defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration, because there is no order subject to reconsideration at this time, and deny defendant’s Petition for Removal.            We note that reconsideration may be had only of a final order, decision, or award. (Labor Code section 5900.) An interlocutory proced

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.