Filed 1/12/18 Zuniga v. WCAB CA1/2 (unmodified opinion)   .  Petitioner Saul Zuniga availed himself of the IMR process and then petitioned the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board) to disclose the names of the reviewers. Zuniga points to no authority to suggest that a statute is rendered meaningless simply because his preferred method of enforcing it is unavailable. Under section 4610. 6, subdivision (h), IMR determinations are subject to review, and Zuniga sought, and received, review of the IMR determination in his case.   In claiming that IMR reports are testimonial in character, Zuniga relies on Massachusetts Bonding & Ins.

Download full case here.