Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10960; Mackie v. Dyer (1957) 154 Cal.App.2d 395
Petitions for disqualification must be timely filed within 10 days after notice of hearing or knowledge of grounds and must state facts constituting grounds for disqualification.
The Board dismissed the petition for disqualification as untimely and skeletal, lacking facts to support the claim of bias.
From the decision · page 3Next, petitions for disqualification must be timely filed: "If the workers' compensation
judge assigned to hear the matter and the grounds for disqualification are known, the petition for
disqualification shall be filed not more than 10 days after service of notice of hearing or after
grounds for disqualification are known." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10960.)
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10955(a); Cortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596; Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274
Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board; it requires showing substantial prejudice or irreparable harm and that reconsideration is not an adequate remedy.
The Board applied this standard to deny removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm and that reconsideration would be adequate.
From the decision · page 1Removal 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, 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate
Lab. Code, §§ 5903, 5952(d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10515; Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473
Decisions must be based on admitted evidence and supported by substantial evidence; summary judgment is not permitted in workers' compensation cases.
The Board reminded defendant that summary judgment is not permitted and decisions must be based on evidence, rejecting defendant's request for summary judgment on sanctions.
From the decision · page 2Decisions of the Appeals Board "must be based on admitted evidence in the
record." (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (Hamilton) (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 476
(Appeals Board en banc).) Furthermore, decisions of the Appeals Board must be supported by
substantial evidence. (Lab. Code, § 5903, 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
(1974) 11 Cal.3d 274 [39 Cal.Comp.Cases 310]; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970)
3 Cal.3d 312 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500]; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1
Cal.3d 627 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 16].) An adequate and complete record is necessary to understand
the basis for the WCJ's decision. (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10761.)