Elayne Valdez v. Warehouse Demo Services; Zurich North America, Adjusted by ESIS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 1 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 3 Case No. ADJ7048296 4 ELAYNE VALDEZ, 5 Applicant, 6 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) vs. 7 8 9 WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, Adjusted by ESIS, Defendant(s). 10 11 12 On April 20, 2011, the Appeals Board issued an en banc decision which held that where 13 unauthorized treatment is obtained outside a validly established and properly noticed MPN, reports 14 from the non-MPN doctors are inadmissible, and therefore may not be relied upon, and that 15 defendant is not liable for the cost of the non-MPN reports. 16 On May 16, 2011, applicant Elayne Valdez filed a timely petition for reconsideration from 17 the Appeals Board’s en banc decision. 1 18 applicant’s petition for reconsideration. On June 3, 2011, applicant submitted a request to file a 19 supplemental pleading in response to defendant’s answer, along with the supplemental pleading, 20 which we allow pursuant to WCAB Rule 10848 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10848). On May 27, 2011, defendant filed an answer to 21 Taking into account the statutory time constraints for acting on the petitions, and after 22 again reviewing the entire record, we believe reconsideration must be granted in order to allow 23 sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. We believe that this 24 action is necessary to give us a complete understanding of the record and to enable us to issue a 25 26 27 1 On May 16, 2011, Armando Saldivar, an applicant in another case (ADJ7516842), also filed a petition for reconsideration, or in the alternative, a petition for removal, from the Appeals Board’s en banc decision. 1 2 just and reasoned decision. Reconsideration will be granted for this purpose and for such further proceedings as we may hereinafter determine to be appropriate. 3 For the foregoing reasons, 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 IT IS ORDERED that Reconsideration of the Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration (En Banc) issued on April 20, 2011, is GRANTED. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// VALDEZ, Elayne 2 1 2 3 4 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration in the above case, all further correspondence, objections, motions, requests and communications shall be filed with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, P. O. Box 429459, San Francisco, California 94142-9459, ATTENTION: Office of the Commissioners, and not with any local office. 6 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 7 8 /s/ Joseph M. Miller___________________________ JOSEPH M. MILLER, Chairman 9 10 /s/ Frank M. Brass____________________________ FRANK M. BRASS, Commissioner 11 12 13 /s/ Ronnie G. Caplane_________________________ RONNIE G. CAPLANE, Commissioner 14 15 /s/ Alfonso J. Moresi__________________________ ALFONSO J. MORESI, Commissioner 16 17 /s/ Deidra E. Lowe____________________________ DEIDRA E. LOWE, Commissioner 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 7/14/2011 SERVICE MADE BY MAIL ON ABOVE DATE ON THE PERSONS LISTED BELOW AT THEIR ADDRESSES AS SHOWN ON THE CURRENT OFFICIAL ADDRESS RECORD: 26 ELAYNE VALDEZ JEFFREY N. SARDELL JOHN MENDOZA CARL FELDMAN 27 VB/bea 25 VALDEZ, Elayne 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
