Not Showing Video Surveillance Evidence to Other Party's Expert

In M/A Com-Phi v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1998), 65 Cal. App. 4th 1020, the court remanded for further development of the record because the employee's experts had viewed a surveillance videotape, but the employer's expert had not. The M/A Com-Phi court stated that: "In the matter before us, injury is admitted but competent medical evidence as to nature and extent is lacking. the WCJ (administrative law judge) was free to reject the opinions of the employee's doctors, which included consideration of the surveillance films. However, in order to ensure reliance on substantial evidence, and a complete adjudication of the issues consistent with due process, it was necessary for the WCJ or the WCAB (Workers' Compensation Appeals Board) to have facilitated review of this critical information by Drs. Stalberg and Ruffman, or to employ some other reasonable and fair method considering the circumstances. . . . the language of Labor Code sections 5701 and 5906 is not specific to employees, and awarding benefits based on medical opinions lacking crucial information violates the employer's due process rights." (Id. at pp. 1025-1026.)