News and Insights

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

SENEL ACOSTA vs. CREATIVE WATERWAYS, INC.; YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, INC.

CREATIVE WATERWAYS, INC.; YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, INC. SENEL ACOSTA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIASENEL ACOSTA, Applicant,vs.CREATIVE WATERWAYS, INC.; YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, INC., Defendants.Case No. ADJ7775067(Goleta District Office)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL ANDDECISION AFTER REMOVAL            Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Removal, requesting that the Appeals Board rescind the Order dated July 16, 2012, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered this matter off calendar and “at parties’ request, orders [Medical Unit] to issue PQME [presumably panel of qualified medical evaluators] in psych.” Defendant contends that the Order will cause further delay and require defendant to pay for a panel QME, which will irreparably harm and prejudice defendant. Applicant has filed an Answer.            Applicant, while employed as a foreman supervisor on January 7, 2011, sustained an industrial injury to multiple body parts. He has been evaluated by an agreed medical evaluator (AME) in orthopedic surgery. There was a mandatory settlement conference (MSC) on May 7, 2012. The case was taken off calendar to allow for the deposition of the AME on June 6, 2012. There was a status conference on June 18, 2012, which was taken off calendar. In his Report and Recommendation, the WCJ states that defendant then filed another Declaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR).1 Applicant filed an objection, but the objection refers to a DOR dated March 26, 2012, which applicant claims to have received on June 19, 2012. 1 This document, if it exists, has not been scanned into EAMS. ,             In any event, the case was again set for MSC on July 16, 2012. At that time the WCJ ordered the parties, to develop the record by obtaining a panel of QMEs pursuant to Labor Code section 4062.2.2 Defendant now objects.            In McDuffie v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority (2002) 67 C

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 *