From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

2011-EB-3 (2011) ELAYNE VALDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA Adjusted by ESIS

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Jul 14, 2011
2011-EB-3 (2011) (Cal. W.C.A.B. Jul. 14, 2011)

Opinion


California Workers Compensation Decisions

2011.

En banc decisions

2011-EB-3 (2011). ELAYNE VALDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA Adjusted by ESIS

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD
STATE OF CALIFORNIA


ELAYNE VALDEZ,
Applicant, vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, Adjusted by ESIS, Defendant(s).


Case No. ADJ7048296


OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION
(EN BANC)


On April 20, 2011, the Appeals Board issued an en banc decision which held that where unauthorized treatment is obtained outside a validly established and properly noticed MPN, reports from the non-MPN doctors are inadmissible, and therefore may not be relied upon, and that defendant is not liable for the cost of the non-MPN reports.

On May 16, 2011, applicant Elayne Valdez filed a timely petition for reconsideration from the Appeals Board's en banc decision.(fn1) On May 27, 2011, defendant filed an answer to applicant's petition for reconsideration. On June 3, 2011, applicant submitted a request to file a supplemental pleading in response to defendant's answer, along with the supplemental pleading, which we allow pursuant to WCAB Rule 10848 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10848).

Taking into account the statutory time constraints for acting on the petitions, and after again reviewing the entire record, we believe reconsideration must be granted in order to allow sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. We believe that this action is necessary to give us a complete understanding of the record and to enable us to issue a just and reasoned decision. Reconsideration will be granted for this purpose and for such further proceedings as we may hereinafter determine to be appropriate. For the foregoing reasons,

IT IS ORDERED that Reconsideration of the Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration (En Banc) issued on April 20, 2011, is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration in the above case, all further correspondence, objections, motions, requests and communications shall be filed with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, P. O. Box 429459, San Francisco, California 94142-9459, ATTENTION: Office of the Commissioners, and not with any local office.


WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD


Joseph M. Miller
JOSEPH M. MILLER, Chairman
Frank M. Brass
FRANK M. BRASS, Commissioner
Ronnie G. Caplane
RONNIE G. CAPLANE, Commissioner
Alfonso J. Moresi
ALFONSO J. MORESI, Commissioner
Deidra E. Lowe
DEIDRA E. LOWE, Commissioner


DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
7/14/2011


SERVICE MADE BY MAIL ON ABOVE DATE ON THE PERSONS LISTED BELOW AT THEIR ADDRESSES AS SHOWN ON THE CURRENT OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD:


ELAYNE VALDEZ


JEFFREYN. SARDELL


JOHN MENDOZA


CARL FELDMAN


VB/bea


_________________
Footnote:


1. On May 16, 2011, Armando Saldivar, an applicant in another case (ADJ7516842), also filed a petition for reconsideration, or in the alternative, a petition for removal, from the Appeals Board's en banc decision.


Summaries of

2011-EB-3 (2011) ELAYNE VALDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA Adjusted by ESIS

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Jul 14, 2011
2011-EB-3 (2011) (Cal. W.C.A.B. Jul. 14, 2011)
Case details for

2011-EB-3 (2011) ELAYNE VALDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA Adjusted by ESIS

Case Details

Full title:2011-EB-3 (2011) ELAYNE VALDEZ vs. WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH…

Court:California Workers Compensation Decisions

Date published: Jul 14, 2011

Citations

2011-EB-3 (2011) (Cal. W.C.A.B. Jul. 14, 2011)