Jessica Fliehmann, vs. Contra Costa County,

In this case, Jessica Fliehmann is appealing a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of Contra Costa County. The Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied the petition for removal. The Board determined that the decision was an intermediate procedural or evidentiary issue and not a "final" order, and that removal was an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised. The Board also determined that the petitioner had not shown that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result if removal was denied.

Contra Costa County, Jessica Fliehmann, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJESSICA FLIEHMANN,Applicant,vs.CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,Defendant.Case No. ADJ9886681(Oakland District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and Removal and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and based on the WCJ’s analysis of the merits as stated in the report, we will dismiss the petition to the extent it seeks reconsideration and deny it to the extent it seeks removal.            A petition for reconsideration may only be taken from a “final” order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5902, 5903.) A “final” order has been defined as one that either “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 39, 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661, 665]) or determines a “threshold” issue that is fundamental to the claim for benefits. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1070, 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 650-651, 655-656].) Interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions, entered in the midst of the workers’ compensation proceedings, are not considered “final” orders. (Maranian, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases at p. 655] (“interim orders, which do not decide a threshold issue, such as intermediate procedural or evidentiary decisions, are not ‘final’ “); Rymer, supra, 211 Cal.App.3d at p. 1180 (“[t]he term [‘final’] does not include intermediate procedural orders or discovery orders”); Kaiser Foundation

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.