What the panel ordered
The Board grants reconsideration, rescinds the August 10, 2023 F&O, and returns the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision by the WCJ.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of the August 10, 2023 Findings and Order (F&O) denying her claim based on the six-month employment rule under Labor Code section 3208.3(d). The WCJ found applicant did not sustain injury arising out of employment and barred the claim. The WCJ's decision is reviewed for legal and evidentiary sufficiency.
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.
The Board found the WCJ erred in applying the six-month employment rule and in concluding the claim was barred without sufficient evidence of employment length and injury causation. The Board rescinded the F&O and remanded for further proceedings to develop the record.
From the decision · page 3We begin by noting that, as we read the Findings of Fact, it appears that the WCJ believed that a determination that applicant was not employed for six months meant that: 1) applicant's claim was barred by section 3208.3(d), and 2) applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE. However, the latter is an incorrect reading of section 3208.3(d); that portion of the statute has nothing to do with whether an injury was industrial, i.e., AOE/COE. Additionally, injury AOE/COE was not an issue identified for determination at trial. Thus, the WCJ's finding that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE was unnecessary and lacked any legal basis.