PHILLIP SCORSONE vs. MALCOLM DEMILLE, SPARTA INSURANCE PROGRAM

This case concerns a defendant's petition for removal granted by the Appeals Board, rescinding a trial continuance order and taking the matter off calendar. The Board found the defendant had not been afforded sufficient opportunity for discovery, specifically regarding the panel qualified medical evaluator's report and a diminished future earning capacity expert. The Board emphasized the need for meaningful settlement discussions and timely completion of discovery, noting the applicant's attorney's conduct in filing multiple readiness declarations without good faith settlement efforts. The dissenting commissioner argued that the applicant had disclosed their strategy and the defendant had not taken adequate steps to depose experts or resolve disputes.