Updated Daily
Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.
The WCJ's decision is rescinded due to procedural issues (lack of record compliance with WCAB Rule 10566(c), Hamilton v. Lockheed Corp., and Labor Code § 5313). The case is returned for further proceedings.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an award of $5,000.00 in attorney fees. The defendant argued the award was improper as Labor Code section 4607 does not apply to enforcement of awards and a specific finding under Labor Code section 5313 was missing. The Board rescinded the award and returned the matter to the trial level pending a California Supreme Court decision on relevant attorney fees issues.
This case involves a cost petitioner's request for reconsideration of a prior WCJ order. The WCJ had found that the cost petitioner waived further claims by not objecting to an order allowing only a portion of their requested costs. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the matter for further proceedings. This was because the WCJ failed to rule on all issues presented in the cost petitioner's petition, specifically penalties, interest, attorney's fees, and sanctions, as required by Labor Code § 5313.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order dismissing Lien Claimant True Scan Legal Copy Service's lien. The lien claimant failed to appear at a lien trial and subsequently failed to provide a timely objection to the notice of intent to dismiss. The Board found that the lien claimant's arguments regarding phone availability, due process, and Labor Code section 5313 were without merit. Additionally, the Board admonished the lien claimant for improper identification of signatories and font size in their petition.
This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order denies the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopts and incorporates the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ's report is deemed to cure any defects in satisfying Labor Code section 5313 requirements. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration is denied.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was improperly filed from a non-final interlocutory order. The Board also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board admonished defense counsel for miscaptioning the petition and misapplying Labor Code section 5313. Sanctions may be considered by the Workers' Compensation Judge for frivolous arguments.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the original decision failed to comply with Labor Code section 5313. The decision lacked specific reasoning and citations to the evidentiary record, making it impossible to ascertain the basis for the WCJ's finding of timely payment. The Board rescinded the decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision that properly articulates its findings. This will allow the parties to again seek reconsideration if aggrieved by the new decision.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award due to significant procedural deficiencies. The original decision failed to adequately memorialize submitted issues, stipulated facts, and the evidence relied upon, violating Labor Code §5313 and case law. Specifically, the Minutes of Hearing and the Opinion on Decision lacked clarity regarding stipulated injuries and the basis for disability findings. The case is remanded to the trial level for proper proceedings and a new decision.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinded the previous Findings and Award, and returned the case for a new decision. The WCAB found that the original decision by the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) failed to adequately reference specific evidence and failed to provide a sufficient basis for its findings on permanent disability and apportionment. Additionally, the WCAB determined that the attorney's fee award lacked proper explanation and calculation. The matter is to be returned to the WCJ to issue a new decision that fully complies with legal requirements, particularly Labor Code section 5313.
Applicant, Sedalia Searcy (Green), sought removal of a WCJ's Findings and Order denying her request for a new Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME), arguing the F&O failed to address issues submitted at trial, including the disqualification of Dr. Julius Woythaler's QME reports. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the Petition for Removal. The Board rescinded the WCJ's May 20, 2022 decision and returned the matter for further proceedings and a new decision, providing extensive guidance on evaluating medical-legal evidence and compliance with Labor Code sections 5313, 5815, and 4628.
Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.