Skip to main content
Print

Lopez v. Swift Transportation (2024 Cal. Wrk. Comp. P.D. LEXIS 59)

 

The WCAB rescinded a WCJ’s decision finding that an applicant was permanently totally disabled when the parties failed to complete a pretrial conference statement (PTCS) by the close of a mandatory settlement conference (MSC).

The WCJ instructed the parties to file a PTCS within 20 days of trial. The applicant served a vocational report and listed it on the PTCS filed more than a month after the MSC concluded, and the defendant asserted that it was not admissible.

The WCJ admitted the vocational report, and in the middle of trial, stayed discovery of the defendant’s vocational expert and QME, while allowing the applicant to obtain additional discovery before determining that he was 100 percent disabled based on an inability to compete in the open labor market.

The WCAB explained that reviewing, completing and filing the PTCS at the MSC ensures that the WCJ complies with the statutory requirement to properly frame the issues and stipulations for trial, and satisfies due process because the parties have had notice and an opportunity to be heard.

The WCAB stated that if the WCJ required the parties to disclose witnesses and exhibits at the MSC by way of a properly filed PTCS and required them to serve those exhibits at the MSC, defendants would have received notice as to the contents of applicants’ vocational expert reports and would have had the opportunity to request leave for additional discovery.

The WCAB added that the purpose of the Statute is to preclude trial by surprise, and an order that the parties disclose witnesses and exhibits on a later date puts the parties at risk of preparing for trial without knowing what evidence exists.

The WCAB concluded that the defendant’s due process rights were violated because the WCJ failed to follow proper procedure and required that disclosure of exhibits and witnesses occur before setting the matter for trial.

The WCAB also concluded that the vocational report did not constitute substantial evidence.