From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

SACARIAS MENDEZ, TOMAS MENDEZ, PEDRO MENDEZ, LAZARO LOPEZ, FRANCISCO MENDEZ, Applicants v. BETTER LIVING SO. CAL GROUP CORP.; MED-CENTURY INSURANCE CO., FARMERS INSURANCE Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Dec 23, 2021
ADJ12924233 (MF), ADJ12881283, ADJ12881284, ADJ12883225, ADJ12883276 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Dec. 23, 2021)

Opinion


SACARIAS MENDEZ, TOMAS MENDEZ, PEDRO MENDEZ, LAZARO LOPEZ, FRANCISCO MENDEZ, Applicants v. BETTER LIVING SO. CAL GROUP CORP.; MED-CENTURY INSURANCE CO., FARMERS INSURANCE Defendants Nos. ADJ12924233 (MF), ADJ12881283, ADJ12881284, ADJ12883225, ADJ12883276 California Workers Compensation Decisions Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California December 23, 2021

Santa Ana 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 JOSé H. RAZO, COMMISSIONER, CRAIG SNELLINGS, COMMISSIONER


Summaries of

SACARIAS MENDEZ, TOMAS MENDEZ, PEDRO MENDEZ, LAZARO LOPEZ, FRANCISCO MENDEZ, Applicants v. BETTER LIVING SO. CAL GROUP CORP.; MED-CENTURY INSURANCE CO., FARMERS INSURANCE Defendants

California Workers Compensation Decisions
Dec 23, 2021
ADJ12924233 (MF), ADJ12881283, ADJ12881284, ADJ12883225, ADJ12883276 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Dec. 23, 2021)
Case details for

SACARIAS MENDEZ, TOMAS MENDEZ, PEDRO MENDEZ, LAZARO LOPEZ, FRANCISCO MENDEZ, Applicants v. BETTER LIVING SO. CAL GROUP CORP.; MED-CENTURY INSURANCE CO., FARMERS INSURANCE Defendants

Case Details

Full title:SACARIAS MENDEZ, TOMAS MENDEZ, PEDRO MENDEZ, LAZARO LOPEZ, FRANCISCO…

Court:California Workers Compensation Decisions

Date published: Dec 23, 2021

Citations

ADJ12924233 (MF), ADJ12881283, ADJ12881284, ADJ12883225, ADJ12883276 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Dec. 23, 2021)