What the panel ordered
Removal from the WCJ's October 2, 2006 order is denied; the order for a new QME panel of chiropractors is affirmed.
Defendant sought removal to the Appeals Board from the WCJ's October 2, 2006 order denying removal and ordering a new QME panel.
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.
Applicant had not attended and participated in an examination by the QME selected by defendant from the prior panel, so she had not 'received' a comprehensive medical-legal evaluation and was entitled to a new QME panel.
From the decision · page 26 We hold, for purposes of sections 4062.1(e) and 4062.2(e), that an employee has
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant never attended and participated in an examination by the QME selected from the prior panel.