What the panel ordered
Petition for removal granted; May 27, 2026 Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings.p. 2
Defendant filed a petition for removal from the Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel issued May 27, 2026, by the WCJ; the WCJ filed a Report recommending denial; the Appeals Board granted removal and rescinded the May 27, 2026 order, returning the matter to the trial level to create a record.
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.
Removal granted because the WCJ ordered a replacement chiropractic QME panel without creating a record, violating due process and causing irreparable harm to defendant.
From the decision · page 1Defendant has filed a petition for removal from the “Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel under 8 CCR § 31.5” (F&O) issued on May 27, 2026, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Defendant contends that the chiropractic panel order was improper because applicant’s notice to defendant of their intent to request a panel was not proper. We have not received an Answer from applicant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny removal. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record we will grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will rescind the May 27, 2026 F&O and return this matter to the trial level to create a record. 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.,
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
WCJ ordered replacement chiropractic QME panel without creating a record.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This violated the parties' right to due process, constituting irreparable harm to defendant, justifying removal.
From the decision · page 1Defendant has filed a petition for removal from the “Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel under 8 CCR § 31.5” (F&O) issued on May 27, 2026, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Defendant contends that the chiropractic panel order was improper because applicant’s notice to defendant of their intent to request a panel was not proper. We have not received an Answer from applicant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny removal. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record we will grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will rescind the May 27, 2026 F&O and return this matter to the trial level to create a record. 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.,
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)
Removal will be granted only if petitioner shows substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal is not granted, and reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final adverse decision issues.
Removal granted because the order violated due process by not creating a record, causing irreparable harm.
From the decision · page 1Defendant has filed a petition for removal from the “Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel under 8 CCR § 31.5” (F&O) issued on May 27, 2026, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Defendant contends that the chiropractic panel order was improper because applicant’s notice to defendant of their intent to request a panel was not proper. We have not received an Answer from applicant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny removal. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record we will grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will rescind the May 27, 2026 F&O and return this matter to the trial level to create a record. 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.,
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
WCJ ordered replacement panel without creating a record, violating due process rights
From the decision · page 1Defendant has filed a petition for removal from the “Finding and Order Re: Replacement QME Panel under 8 CCR § 31.5” (F&O) issued on May 27, 2026, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Defendant contends that the chiropractic panel order was improper because applicant’s notice to defendant of their intent to request a panel was not proper. We have not received an Answer from applicant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny removal. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record we will grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will rescind the May 27, 2026 F&O and return this matter to the trial level to create a record. 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.,
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.