What the panel ordered
Petition granted; F&O affirmed except date of injury in ADJ11177494 corrected to January 1, 2007 – January 25, 2018p. 4
Defendant's petition for reconsideration/removal of WCJ's Joint Findings of Fact and Order dated August 7, 2023
This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold June 19, 2023.
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
WCJ's analysis of the merits of the petitioner's arguments adopted; removal standard not met
From the decision · page 1that applicant claims injury to various body parts while employed by defendant as a clerk on September 11, 2017 (ADJ11177494); and that applicant is entitled to an additional qualified medical evaluator (QME) in rheumatology.
Corrected to stipulated period January 1, 2007 to January 25, 2018
From the decision · page 1Defendant contends that applicant is not entitled to an additional QME panel in rheumatology because the existing QME in internal medicine is sufficient; and that the date of injury in ADJ11177494 should be corrected to January 1, 2007, to January 25, 2018, as stipulated at the time of trial.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
WCJ's analysis of the merits of the petitioner's arguments in the WCJ's report adopted by Appeals Board
Favours Applicant prevailed
Board relied on WCJ report to deny removal and affirm QME order
From the decision · page 1Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits of the petitioner’s arguments in the WCJ’s report, we will grant the Petition as one seeking reconsideration, affirm the F&O, except that we amend it to correct the date of injury in ADJ11177494 to January 1, 2007, to January 25, 2018.
Parties stipulated at trial to date of injury January 1, 2007 to January 25, 2018 in ADJ11177494
Favours Defendant prevailed
Stipulation required correction of erroneous September 11, 2017 date
From the decision · page 1Defendant contends that applicant is not entitled to an additional QME panel in rheumatology because the existing QME in internal medicine is sufficient; and that the date of injury in ADJ11177494 should be corrected to January 1, 2007, to January 25, 2018, as stipulated at the time of trial.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a)
Removal standard: significant prejudice or irreparable harm required; reconsideration must not be adequate remedy
Applied to interlocutory QME panel order; not satisfied
From the decision · page 22 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra;
Aldi v. Carr, McClellan, Ingersoll, Thompson & Horn (2006) 71 Cal.Comp.Cases 783
Threshold issue renders decision final for reconsideration purposes
Date of injury finding is threshold; triggers reconsideration jurisdiction
From the decision · page 2Preliminarily, we observe that if a decision includes resolution of a “threshold” issue, then it is a “final” decision, whether or not all issues are resolved or there is an ultimate decision on the right to benefits. ( Aldi v. Carr, McClellan, Ingersoll, Thompson & Horn (2006) 71 Cal.Comp.Cases 783, 784, fn.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.