Tasha Holman, vs. Reply, Inc. And One Beacon America Insurancecompany,

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by Defendant Reply, Inc. and One Beacon America Insurance Company. The Petition requested that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated November 13, 2014, wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered the matter continued to trial and closed discovery except for the deposition of the panel qualified medical evaluator (QME). The Appeals Board found that the Petitioner had not met the standards for removal, and thus denied the Petition.

REPLY, INC. and ONE BEACON AMERICA INSURANCECOMPANY, TASHA HOLMAN, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIATASHA HOLMAN, Applicant,vs.REPLY, INC. and ONE BEACON AMERICA INSURANCECOMPANY, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7716803(Oakland District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FORREMOVAL            Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated November 13, 2014, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered this matter continued to trial and closed discovery except for the deposition of John H. Devor, M.D., the panel qualified medical evaluator (QME) in this case, scheduled for February 17, 2015. Defendant contends that Dr. Devor should be disqualified as QME because he did not make himself available for deposition within 120 days of the notice of deposition; that defendant is entitled to conduct further discovery; and that the medical record must be developed because there is not now substantial medical evidence upon which an award can be based. Applicant has not filed an answer.            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, § 1 0843(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) The petitioner also 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, petitioner has not met these standards./// ,             For the foregoing reasons,            IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s Petition for Rem

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.