WARNER BROTHERS HOME ENTERTAINMENT INC permissibly self-insured WENDY SHALVOY WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAWENDY SHALVOY, Applicant,vs.WARNER BROTHERS HOMEENTERTAINMENT, INC., permissibly self-insured, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ9122601ADJ9122724(Van Nuys District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FORREMOVAL, GRANTINGRECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Applicant, Wendy Shalvoy, filed a timely Petition for Removal from the Joint Findings of Fact (Findings) issued April 15, 2014, challenging the Findings of the workers’ compensation judge administrative law judge (WCJ) that although applicant was temporary totally disabled from September 27, 2013, and continuing, applicant’s receipt of benefits from a separation agreement constituted salary continuation and therefore, no temporary disability benefits were payable. Defendant filed an Answer. The WCJ prepared a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report). Applicant argues that the separation agreement does not bar applicant from receiving temporary disability benefits. We agree. However, since the WCJ’s award of temporary disability benefits and the finding that those benefits are not payable is a final order, we will treat applicant’s Petition for Removal as a Petition for Reconsideration. A “final” order has been defined as one “which determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case.” (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1180; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 534-535 [45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410, 413]; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 29, 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661, 665].) Interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions, entered in the midst of the workers’ compensation proceedings, are not considered to be “final” orders because they do not determine any substantive question. (Maranian v. W
Menu
