Bering, Julia

Defendant petitioned for removal from a WCJ's order setting the matter for a remote trial, arguing that a remote format was inappropriate because applicant's credibility was at issue regarding additional panel QMEs. The Appeals Board reviewed the petition, applicant's answer, and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation, which recommended denying removal. The Board held that defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. The Board reasoned that the parties would have full opportunity at the remote trial to create a record, and the WCJ could evaluate credibility and determine whether a continuance for in-person testimony was warranted. The Board also overruled defendant's objection that the remote trial was a means to spare applicant's attorney travel expenses, noting that professional courtesy requests should be liberally granted. Removal was denied.