News and Insights

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

Mario Morales Cardona vs. Pabco Building Products Llc Administered By Corvel Corporation

PABCO BUILDING PRODUCTS LLC Administered by CORVEL CORPORATION MARIO MORALES CARDONA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARIO MORALES-CARDONA, Applicant,vs.PABCO BUILDING PRODUCTS, LLC;Administered by CORVEL CORPORATION, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ8514600ADJ8516078ADJ8534133(Los Angeles District Office)OPINION AND ORDERDENYING PETITION FORREMOVAL            Applicant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order Compelling Attendance at Medical Exam dated May 13, 2014, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered applicant to appear for a medical examination by Dr. Kheim Dao on May 30, 2014. Applicant contends that an employer should not be entitled to obtain a qualified medical evaluator (QME) evaluation after a panel QME has already evaluated the applicant; that he was entitled to a hearing prior to being ordered to attend another QME evaluation; and that the WCJ did not comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 5313. Defendant has filed an Answer.            After our review of the record, we deny the petition. 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, § l 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./ / / ,             We note that since the date of the examination by Dr. Dao has p


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Your email address will not be published.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 *