Sincerely,

At the California Workers' Compensation Defense Attorneys' Association 2013 Winter Conference, a panel led by the Honorable Anne Horelly, defense attorney Sharon Renzi and applicant's attorney John Reff presented practical and procedural insights for litigating a case in the post SB 863 era. Judge Horelly began by asking "Where does the trial start". [Smartly, no one from the audience answered by saying "the Court House".] For applicants, Mr. Reff explained that the trial starts with the completion of the Application for Adjudication of Claim. Taking insight from the Court of Appeals unpublished opinion in Guild v. WCAB (1999) 64 Cal. Comp. Cases 175, Ms. Renzi explained that as a defense attorney, she likes to file Answers in response to the Application for Adjudication. In sum, all participants agreed that the "Trial" begins with the initial pleading presented by each side. Read more.

Medical-Legal Procedure; Assignment and Selection of Panel Qualified Medical Evaluators. WCAB, dismissing defendant's petition for reconsideration as premature and denying removal, held that applicant/driver who incurred cumulative industrial injury to multiple body parts during period 5/7/2011 through 5/7/2012, timely exercised his right to strike members from replacement qualified medical evaluator panels in orthopedics and internal medicine assigned on 1/3/2013, when WCAB found that (1) process in Labor Code § 4062.2, as amended by SB 863, applied to 1/3/2013 panel qualified medical evaluator assignment and selection, because Labor Code § 4062.2 is procedural statute and, as such, is to be applied prospectively, and because, in SB 863 section 84, Legislature expressed intent to apply amendments to all pending cases, regardless of date of injury, (2) pursuant to discussion of Code of Civil Procedure § 1013 in Messele v. Pitco Foods, Inc. (2011) 76 Cal. Comp. Cases 956 (Appeals Board en banc opinion),...read more.