SIMILARCASE

Loading

ADJ20506369 — California WCAB decision · SimilarCase

Sign in Sign up Try a case →

California WCABPanel decision

ADJ20506369 · September 2, 2025

Petition for Reconsideration dismissed as premature and returned to trial level for treatment as petition to set aside.

Issues decided: 1
Medical opinions weighed: 0
Authorities named: 3
District office: Riverside

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration dismissed as premature and returned to trial level for treatment as petition to set aside.

Defendant sought reconsideration of the Order Approving Compromise and Release issued by the WCJ on June 24, 2025; the WCJ issued a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration recommending denial or remand; the WCAB dismissed the petition and returned the matter to the trial level to be treated as a petition to set aside.

Read the official decision →

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.

Reconsideration / removalDefendant prevailed

The petition was dismissed as premature because the WCJ had not yet held a hearing to address the alleged double recovery and EDD lien issues, and the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

From the decision · page 1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on June 24, 2025.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

Private workspace

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

Paste the dispute. The extractor builds the factors, the search finds the decisions the same facts won, and the matter stays saved. Free account.

Start a matter Search without an account →

The settlement made no mention of the EDD lien or any alleged double recovery, and the parties were unaware of any liens against compensation at the time of settlement.

Favours Defendant prevailed

The court cannot make findings or award credits for double recovery without agreement of both parties, thus the petition was premature.

From the decision · page 4The court believes that Defendant has made a unilateral mistake regarding the existence of the EDD lien, or that the parties made a mutual mistake. The settlement makes no mention of the EDD lien, or any alleged double recovery, and neither does the accompanying cover letter. Instead, the settlement states on p. 6 that Defendant will pay, adjust, or litigate all liens of record, and that the parties were "unaware of any liens against compensation." The settlement also states that "Defendant not liable for any liens against compensation including but not limited to liens arising out of child or spousal support."[] The court was never asked to make any findings regarding a double recovery and was never asked to give Defendant a credit for any of the payments made by EDD to the Applicant, and there was no agreed credit on p. 6 of the C&R. The court cannot make such findings or award such credits in an OAC&R without the agreement of both parties.

Service of the WCJ's Report and transmission of the case to the Appeals Board occurred on the same day, providing actual notice to the parties of the commencement of the 60-day period for Board action.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This ensured the Board acted timely on the petition as required by Labor Code section 5909.

From the decision · page 3Here, according to the proof of service for the Report and Recommendation by the workers' compensation administrative law judge, the Report was served on July 3, 2025, and the case was transmitted to the Appeals Board on July 3, 2025. Service of the Report and transmission of the case to the Appeals Board occurred on the same day. Thus, we conclude that the parties were provided with the notice of transmission required by Labor Code section 5909(b)(1) because service of the Report in compliance with Labor Code section 5909(b)(2) provided them with actual notice as to the commencement of the 60-day period on July 3, 2025.