What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
From the decision · page 1Defendant seeks removal of the Findings and Order (F&O) issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on August 24, 2022, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that pursuant to Administrative Director rule 979, qualified medical examiner (QME) Rex Lockwood, D.C., is entitled to additional advanced payment of a minimum of two hours for his deposition.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Dr. Lockwood spent one hour preparing and attempted numerous times to connect for the first deposition but was unable to testify due to technical difficulties.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This unrebutted testimony established entitlement to payment for preparation and attempted testimony despite no actual testimony, supporting the panel's decision to require payment before a second deposition.
From the decision · page 2Q. Okay. And you did not provide med-legal testimony that day; correct? A. I prepared an hour, and I got on the number that was provided me by yourself, your office. And I attempted numerous times to connect, and it failed, and I called both your office and applicant's office and did not receive anyone and then left voice mails for both offices that I was having difficulty. I continued to wait through some of the time, probably at least a half an hour, 40 minutes of the deposition's scheduled time. Nobody contacted me, and therefore I was unable to testify. Q. Okay. So confirming, you did not testify that day? A. No. (Joint Exh. J7, pp. 6 § 7 [EAMS p. 3].)
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
Dr. Lockwood determined applicant had not reached maximum medical improvement and requested additional diagnostics. He testified he prepared for the first deposition and attempted to connect but was unable to testify due to technical difficulties, entitling him to payment for preparation and attempted testimony.
The panel relied on Dr. Lockwood's unrebutted and convincing testimony about preparation and technical difficulties preventing testimony at the first deposition.
From the decision · page 2QME Dr. Lockwood evaluated applicant on December 19, 2020. He determined that
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Lab. Code, 5710; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 9795; CCP 2034.430(f); CCP 2034.450(a)
Defendant must pay expert witness fees in advance for depositions under CCP 2034.430(f) and 2034.450(a), Labor Code 5710, and AD rule 9795.
From the decision · page 4California Code of Civil Procedure states in relevant part: In a worker's compensation case arising under Division 4 (commencing with Section 3201) or Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 6100) of the Labor Code, a party desiring to depose any expert on another party's expert witness list shall pay the fee under this section. (CCP § 2034.430(f).)
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Dr. Lockwood's unrebutted testimony about preparation and technical difficulties preventing testimony at the first deposition
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.