Nahid Javadi vs. Simi Valley Hospital; Adventist Health Systems West,

(VNO 0417016)This case is about Nahid Javadi, an employee of Simi Valley Hospital, who sustained an industrial injury to her low back on August 12, 2000. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal and rescinded the orders joining National Union Fire for AIG Domestic Claims (AIG) as a party defendant. The Board found that the defendant was permissibly self-insured and self-administered and that AIG was not a necessary party to the case.

Simi Valley Hospital; Adventist Health Systems West, Nahid Javadi WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIANAHID JAVADI, Applicant, Vs. SIMI VALLEY HOSPITAL; ADVENTISTHEALTH SYSTEMS WEST,Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ3910048 (VNO 0417016) OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL On May 12, 2010, defendant Simi Valley/Adventist Health Systems West (Adventist) filed a verified petition for removal, requesting that the appeals board rescind various orders joining National Union Fire for AIG Domestic Claims (AIG) as party defendant. Adventist contends that it is permissibly self-insured and self-administered and that Adventist will sustain substantial prejudice and irreparable harm if AIG is joined. We have not received an answer from applicant. AIG has been served with the orders and petition for removal, and we have not received an answer from AIG. Adventist has filed a request for permission to file a supplemental petition (see WCAB Rule 10848 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10848). We deny permission, and we do not accept the supplemental petition.  Applicant, while employed as a certified nursing assistant on August 12, 2000, sustained anindustrial injury to her low back. The workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ)issued a Findings and Award dated September 9, 2002. Applicant has filed a timely petition to reopen, which is still pending. For reasons that are nowhere revealed in the pleadings or minutes of hearing, applicant’scounsel has been trying to join what has been referred to as a “reinsurance carrier” or “excess , carrier” for the past eighteen -months. In the Petition for Joinder of Defendant dated December 1,2009, applicant states: “The self-insurance carrier [sic], being a necessary party pursuant to[Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 289 (appeals board en banc)].” In the Petition for Joinder of Defendant dated December 22, 2008, applicant states: “Applicant having been advis

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.