From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ARIEL ORTEGA, Applicant v. SAN DIEGO PADRES; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/ CHUBB C/O SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Aug 24, 2021
ADJ11039518 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 24, 2021)

Opinion


ARIEL ORTEGA, Applicant v. SAN DIEGO PADRES; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/ CHUBB C/O SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants No. ADJ11039518 California Workers Compensation Decisions Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California August 24, 2021

         Santa Ana District Office

         OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL

          MARGUERITE SWEENEY, COMMISSIONER.

         We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the reports of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits of petitioner’s arguments in the WCJ’s reports, we will deny removal.

         Removal 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, former § 10843(a), now § 10955(a) (eff. Jan. 1, 2020); 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, former § 10843(a), now § 10955(a) (eff. Jan. 1, 2020).) 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.

         For the foregoing reasons,

         IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Removal is DENIED.

         I CONCUR,

          KATHERINE A. ZALEWSKI, CHAIR, JOSé H. RAZO, COMMISSIONER


Summaries of

ARIEL ORTEGA, Applicant v. SAN DIEGO PADRES; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/ CHUBB C/O SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Aug 24, 2021
ADJ11039518 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 24, 2021)
Case details for

ARIEL ORTEGA, Applicant v. SAN DIEGO PADRES; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/ CHUBB C/O SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants

Case Details

Full title:ARIEL ORTEGA, Applicant v. SAN DIEGO PADRES; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE…

Court:California Workers Compensation Decisions

Date published: Aug 24, 2021

Citations

ADJ11039518 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 24, 2021)