News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

CHUKWUEMAKA UBA vs. DHL EXPRESS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered By SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

DHL EXPRESS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. CHUKWUEMAKA UBA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACHUKWUEMAKA UBA, Applicant,vs.DHL EXPRESS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by SEDGWICKCLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants.Case No. ADJ6692647(Van Nuys District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING REMOVAL            Defendant, DHL Express, filed a petition for removal of this matter to the Appeals Board for review of the order issued at the Mandatory Settlement Conference on January 12, 2012, setting the matter for trial over defendant’s objection. Defendant contends that it is entitled to obtain a Qualified Medical Evaluation to determine the compensability of applicant’s injury under Labor Code section 4060 and DWC Rule 30(d)(4).            Subsequent to the filing of defendant’s petition, but prior to our consideration of its merits, the parties settled applicant’s claim for an industrial injury on July 27, 2008, to his back, digestive system and psyche while employed as a package handler by DHL Express. The parties’ Compromise and Release Agreement, settling applicant’s claim for $42,500.00, was approved by Order dated March 26, 2012.            With regard to the merits of defendant’s petition for removal, we have considered the allegations and arguments set forth therein, as well as applicant’s answer, and have reviewed the record in this matter and the WCJ’s Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal of January 23, 2012, which considers, and responds to, each of the defendant’s contentions. Based upon our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in the WCJ’s Report, which we adopt and incorporate as the decision of the Board, we deny defendant’s petition for removal.            Moreover, the Appeals Board’s power to remove a case to itself under Labor Code section 5310 is , discretionary and is generally employed only as an extraordinary remedy. (See Butte County v.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Get exclusive access to in-debt interviews.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *