News and Insights

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

Gary Kreft vs. Celestron; California Insurance Guarantee Association, Compwest Insurance Company, Hartford Insurance Company, American Claims Management, State Compensation Insurance Fund

Celestron; California Insurance Guarantee Association, Compwest Insurance Company, Hartford Insurance Company, American Claims Management, State Compensation Insurance Fund Gary Kreft WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGARY KREFT, Applicant,vs.CELESTRON; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendants.Case No. ADJ7539480OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL            Defendant, Everest National Insurance Co. (Everest) has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board amend the Order dated July 27, 2011, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered joinder of Everest and four other insurance carriers as parties defendant. Everest contends that it has no liability pursuant to Labor Code section 5500.5(a).1 Defendant CompWest Insurance Company (CompWest) has filed an answer.            Applicant, while employed as a shipping relations [sic] at Celestron from September 4, 2001, through September 10, 2010, has filed an Application for Adjudication of Claim, claiming to have sustained an industrial injury to unspecified body parts. Apparently, CompWest and Hartford Insurance Co. (Hartford) had coverage for Celestron in the last year of applicant’s employment. Prior to that, Everest and State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) had coverage. All of them were joined as parties defendant.2            Section 5500.5(a) provides that for injuries after January 1, 1981, liability for cumulative injury 1            Unless otherwise specified, all statutory references are to the Labor Code.2            California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) has also been joined, for reasons that are not clear in the record. But see Insurance Code section 1063.1(9). , claims “shall be limited to those employers who employed the employee during t

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Join our community and never miss an update. Stay connected with cutting-edge insights and valuable resources.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

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