From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PETER CUEN, Applicant v. WOOD GROUP; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Aug 25, 2021
ADJ10346285, ADJ11786898 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 25, 2021)

Opinion


PETER CUEN, Applicant v. WOOD GROUP; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants Nos. ADJ10346285, ADJ11786898 California Workers Compensation Decisions Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California August 25, 2021

         San Francisco District Office

         OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL

          KATHERINE A. ZALEWSKI, CHAIR

         We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the report 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 report, 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, DEIDRA E. LOWE, KATHERINE WILLIAMS DODD, COMMISSIONER

         SERVICE MADE ON THE ABOVE DATE ON THE PERSONS LISTED BELOW AT THEIR ADDRESSES SHOWN ON THE CURRENT OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD.

         AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE

         THE ARNS LAW FIRM

         ATLANTIC PLANT MAINTENANCE

         BOEHM ASSOCIATES

         CARPENTERS HEALTH WELFARE

         D W NICHOLSON CORP

         EDD-SDI

         ELECTRIC INSURANCE COMPANY

         ESIS

         KIRK & MYERS

         LAUGHLIN FALBO

         LAURA CHAPMAN

         LIBERTY MUTUAL

         LLOYD AUBRY

         PEARLMAN BROWN

         PETER CUEN

         STOCKWELL HARRIS WOOLVERTON & HELPHREY

         LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS J BURNS

         WOOD GROUP

         ZURICH


Summaries of

PETER CUEN, Applicant v. WOOD GROUP; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Aug 25, 2021
ADJ10346285, ADJ11786898 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 25, 2021)
Case details for

PETER CUEN, Applicant v. WOOD GROUP; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants

Case Details

Full title:PETER CUEN, Applicant v. WOOD GROUP; ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:California Workers Compensation Decisions

Date published: Aug 25, 2021

Citations

ADJ10346285, ADJ11786898 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Aug. 25, 2021)