ADJ12852074 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for removal is denied. To the extent the petition could be construed as seeking to disqualify the WCJ, it is also denied.

Petition for removal was filed and considered by the Appeals Board, with the WCJ's report incorporated into the review.

Read the official decision →

What was disputed, and how it came out

Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.

Reconsideration / removalDefendant prevailed

Petition did not set forth facts, declared under penalty of perjury, sufficient to establish disqualification.

From the decision · page 1Here, as discussed in the WCJ's report, if we were to treat the petition for removal as one for disqualification, the petition does not set forth facts, declared under penalty of perjury, that are sufficient to establish disqualification pursuant to Labor Code section 5311, WCAB Rule 10960

Reconsideration / removalDefendant prevailed

Petitioner did not demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a)

Removal is granted only if petitioner shows substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration is not an adequate remedy.

Applied to deny removal as petitioner did not meet the standard.

From the decision · page 1Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 599, fn. 5 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155]; Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 280, fn. 2 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner ultimately issues. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a).) Here, based upon the WCJ's analysis of the merits of petitioner's arguments, we are not persuaded that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is denied and/or that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if the matter ultimately proceeds to a final decision adverse to petitioner.

Labor Code section 5311; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10960; Code of Civil Procedure section 641(f) and/or (g)

Disqualification requires facts declared under penalty of perjury sufficient to establish grounds under Labor Code section 5311, WCAB Rule 10960, or Code of Civil Procedure section 641(f) and/or (g).

Applied to deny disqualification as petition did not set forth sufficient facts.

From the decision · page 1Here, as discussed in the WCJ's report, if we were to treat the petition for removal as one for disqualification, the petition does not set forth facts, declared under penalty of perjury, that are sufficient to establish disqualification pursuant to Labor Code section 5311, WCAB Rule 10960

ADJ12852074 · October 12, 2022

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

The facts that decided it

The rules the panel named

About this page