I’ve been on the road the last couple of days, speaking as a guest lecturer at the California Workers’ Compensation & Risk Conference, held in Monarch Beach in Orange County.
The conference is primarily attended by insurer claims representatives, self insured administrators, and some defense attorneys. Speakers this year included WCAB Commissioners Ronnie Caplane and Al Moresi as well as the new Administrative Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, Rosa Moran.
Presenting on panels from the viewpoint of injured worker advocacy were myself (on Almaraz-Guzman issues and the Ogilvie decision) and Los Angeles attorney Barry Hinden.
While gone, the California Workers Compensation Appeals Board release 3 en banc decisions. I’ll be providing more commentary on those decisions in coming posts.
One decision dealt with claims of misconduct by a hearing representative who appears on behalf of lien claimants at workers’ comp proceedings. That’s In Re Daniel Escamilla, the text of which can be found here:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/wcab/EnBancdecisi … Daniel.pdf
Another dealt with timeframe technicalities where applicant attorneys and defense attorneys are “racing” to be first to request a QME panel. It’s a procedural case that addresses some uncertainties regarding how panel disputes are to be construed. The case is Tsegay Messele v. Pitco Foods, and the text can be found here:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/wcab/EnBancdecisi … /Messele_T
The most significant of the 3 is Elayne Valdez v.Warehouse Demo Services.
The WCAB had issued a prior en banc from which the applicant appealed.
The text of Valdez II is here:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/wcab/EnBancdecisi … ldez_E.pdf
Check back in the next couple of days for more in-depth commentary on these.