Washington v. Los Rios Community College District, 010101 CAWC, ADJ13442840

• Case Date: January 01, 2001
• Court: California

BRIAN WASHINGTON, Applicant v. LOS RIOS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT; YORK INSURANCE SERVICES; SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants Adjudication No. ADJ13442840 California Workers Compensation Decisions Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California January 1, 2001          Sacramento District Office.          OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL           DEIDRA E. LOWE, COMMISSIONER.          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...