What the panel ordered
The Appeals Board granted the petition for removal and ordered the matter to proceed to a mandatory settlement conference so the WCJ may review the pre-trial conference statement with the parties.
Defendant filed a petition for removal from the Minutes of Hearing issued on April 9, 2026, by the WCJ, which converted an expedited hearing into a mandatory settlement conference and continued the matter to a trial setting.
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.
The Appeals Board found that the defendant's right to due process was violated by setting the matter for trial without completing a pre-trial conference statement on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the statement with the parties, thus granting removal was necessary to avoid substantial prejudice or irreparable harm.
From the decision · page 3Furthermore, violating section 5502 violates the parties' right to due process to be notified of the issues upon which a trial is set. Accordingly, we find that defendant's right to due process has been violated by setting the matter for trial without completing a PTCS on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the PTCS with the parties. As to the issue of the adjuster's testimony, upon return the WCJ may accept defendant's petition for removal as a petition to have the adjuster testify remotely. The WCJ may create a record and decide the request. (Perez v. Chicago Dogs (2025) 90 Cal. Comp. Cases 830, 838, (Appeals Board en banc).) Accordingly, we grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will order this matter to procced to an MSC so that the WCJ may review the PTCS with the parties. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that defendant's Petition for Removal from the Minutes of Hearing issued on April 9, 2026, by the WCJ is GRANTED.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The matter was set for trial without completing a pre-trial conference statement on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the statement with the parties.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This violated the defendant's right to due process, which justified granting the petition for removal to avoid substantial prejudice or irreparable harm.
From the decision · page 3Furthermore, violating section 5502 violates the parties' right to due process to be notified of the issues upon which a trial is set. Accordingly, we find that defendant's right to due process has been violated by setting the matter for trial without completing a PTCS on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the PTCS with the parties. As to the issue of the adjuster's testimony, upon return the WCJ may accept defendant's petition for removal as a petition to have the adjuster testify remotely. The WCJ may create a record and decide the request. (Perez v. Chicago Dogs (2025) 90 Cal. Comp. Cases 830, 838, (Appeals Board en banc).) Accordingly, we grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will order this matter to procced to an MSC so that the WCJ may review the PTCS with the parties. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that defendant's Petition for Removal from the Minutes of Hearing issued on April 9, 2026, by the WCJ is GRANTED.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
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 and will be granted only if the petitioner shows that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted, and that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner ultimately issues.
The Appeals Board applied this standard to determine that the defendant's due process rights were violated, justifying the grant of removal.
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];
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Defendant's right to due process was violated by setting the matter for trial without completing a pre-trial conference statement on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the statement with the parties.
From the decision · page 3Furthermore, violating section 5502 violates the parties' right to due process to be notified of the issues upon which a trial is set. Accordingly, we find that defendant's right to due process has been violated by setting the matter for trial without completing a PTCS on the day of the hearing and without the WCJ reviewing the PTCS with the parties. As to the issue of the adjuster's testimony, upon return the WCJ may accept defendant's petition for removal as a petition to have the adjuster testify remotely. The WCJ may create a record and decide the request. (Perez v. Chicago Dogs (2025) 90 Cal. Comp. Cases 830, 838, (Appeals Board en banc).) Accordingly, we grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will order this matter to procced to an MSC so that the WCJ may review the PTCS with the parties. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that defendant's Petition for Removal from the Minutes of Hearing issued on April 9, 2026, by the WCJ is GRANTED.
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.