CompFox AI Summary
In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinded the WCJ's order setting the matter for trial and closing discovery, and returned the case to the trial level. The Board found that the WCJ's order violated the defendant's due process rights by denying them the opportunity to obtain rebuttal evidence. Specifically, the Board noted that while an employee can obtain a consulting physician's report at their own expense, such a report cannot be the sole basis for an award and must be addressed by a QME or authorized treating physician. The Board concluded that without proper medical-legal discovery pursuant to Labor Code section 4062.2, there was insufficient evidence to proceed to trial on the issue of injury AOE/COE.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, rescinded the WCJ's order setting the matter for trial and closing discovery, and returned the case to the trial level. The Board found that the WCJ's order violated the defendant's due process rights by denying them the opportunity to obtain rebuttal evidence. Specifically, the Board noted that while an employee can obtain a consulting physician's report at their own expense, such a report cannot be the sole basis for an award and must be addressed by a QME or authorized treating physician. The Board concluded that without proper medical-legal discovery pursuant to Labor Code section 4062.2, there was insufficient evidence to proceed to trial on the issue of injury AOE/COE.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.