Dario Morales Dominguez was employed by Shield Platinum Protection LLC when he claimed industrial injuries as a result of a cumulative trauma during the period January 1, 2020 through September 1, 2020 to multiple parts of body. His claim was resolved by Compromise and Release and WCJ Joy issued an Order approving the C&R on May 12, 2022.

On December 15, 2022, lien claimant ABC International (ABC) filed a lien for interpreting services rendered to applicant as a result of his claimed injuries.

After several lien conferences, the case was set for lien trial on April 24, 2024 before WCJ Joy. At the lien trial of April 24, 2024, the WCJ continued the matter to another trial date, and issued the following comments and Order on the Minutes:

– – “[P]arties appear unable to resolve lien and as of this dispo, LC’s exhibits are pending population in EAMS.
– – WCJ has concerns re: Defendant and CCR 10880(a)(3)1. Defendant’s claim adjuster and adjuster’s supervisor are to appear in person at next trial to discuss. IT IS SO ORDERED.”

The Defendant Petitioned Removal of the case to the WCAB in response to the Order issued by the workers compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on April 24, 2024. In that petition the Defendant argued that no good cause exists to compel the personal appearance of the adjuster and the adjuster’s supervisor at an in person trial.

The WCAB granted removal, and rescinded the Order of the WCJ to appear in person, and substitute a new order stating that the claims adjuster and the adjuster’s supervisor must be available by virtual or telephonic appearance at the upcoming trial of this matter in the case of Morales-Dominguez v Shield Platinum Protection LLC -ADJ14175141 (February 2025).

The Petitioner claimed that that an order to appear in person constitutes an undue burden on the adjuster, as it causes a practical hardship, and prevents them from handling other cases that would be impacted by a physical appearance. Petitioner further contended that no monies are due lien claimant as there are unresolved legal issues that prevent settlement, but that the claims adjuster is available either telephonically or by other electronic means, and defendant has complied with WCAB Rule 10880(a).

In response, the WCAB panel noted that “The WCJ has broad authority to issue orders to ensure proper adjudication of each claim, including “any interim, interlocutory and final orders, findings, decisions and awards as may be necessary to the full adjudication of the case.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10330.) This may include Orders that a party appear at a given hearing, should same be warranted.”

“While the WCJ retains the authority to order the adjuster to appear in person for a hearing for good cause if the circumstances warrant it, consideration should be given as to the subject or the nature of the hearing, as well as the dispute, the relief sought, the utility of the adjuster appearing in person versus appearing by phone, and the practical hardship and burden of having to appear in person, factoring in the distance and nature of the travel required. (Derrick Burford v. Cook Concrete Prods., (board panel decision) 2016 Cal. Wrk. Comp. P.D. LEXIS 1, 8.)”

“Here, while the WCJ may wish to bring the parties together and discuss settlement options or inquire further as to issues in dispute prior to commencing trial, we find an Order for both the adjuster and supervisor to appear in person for that purpose excessive. That same goal may be accomplished by an Order for the adjuster and supervisor to appear at trial by either virtual or telephonic means.”