CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the administrative law judge's decision to proceed to trial. The defendant sought to have the agreed medical evaluator reexamine the applicant due to allegedly "stale" medical reports and to file new applications for specific injuries. However, the Board found that the defendant had not demonstrated significant prejudice and that the trial judge could properly address the issues, including the impact of surveillance videos not shown to the AME. The Board concluded that the case should proceed to trial as scheduled.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal, upholding the administrative law judge's decision to proceed to trial. The defendant sought to have the agreed medical evaluator reexamine the applicant due to allegedly "stale" medical reports and to file new applications for specific injuries. However, the Board found that the defendant had not demonstrated significant prejudice and that the trial judge could properly address the issues, including the impact of surveillance videos not shown to the AME. The Board concluded that the case should proceed to trial as scheduled.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.