What the panel ordered
The WCJ's Findings and Order is rescinded and substituted with new Findings deferring the issue of serious and willful violation under Labor Code section 4553, and the matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings.
Petitions for reconsideration of the WCJ Findings and Order issued August 16, 2019, were granted and the matter was reconsidered by the WCAB panel.
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 WCAB has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate claims under section 4553, and the civil settlement did not settle the claim for increased compensation under section 4553. The issue of whether defendant's conduct constituted a serious and willful violation is deferred for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 13FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The WCAB has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate claims under Labor Code section 4553.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The civil settlement explicitly excluded workers' compensation claims.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This exclusion means the civil settlement did not settle the claim for increased compensation under section 4553.
From the decision · page 9Further, the clear language of the Civil Release explicitly states that the parties did not intend to settle applicant's workers' compensation case as part of the settlement in the civil case. (Exhibit KK, p. 1, § 3 [WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and releasees desire to fully compromise and settle all disputes... except WORKERS' COMPENSATION(S)].) Thus, the Civil Release did not and could not resolve any claims that applicant may have before the WCAB, including any claim for increased compensation.
No order approving a final settlement of the workers' compensation case was ever sought or approved by the WCJ.
Favours Applicant prevailed
Without WCJ approval, the civil release is not enforceable before the WCAB and does not settle the claim under section 4553.
From the decision · page 9Here, while applicant does have an award of benefits under the 2016 Findings and Award, there is no order adjudicating applicant's claim for increased benefits under section 4553. More importantly with respect to whether there was an enforceable settlement agreement before the WCAB, no order approving a final settlement of applicant's workers' compensation case was ever sought at the WCAB, and the Civil Release was never presented to a WCJ for approval. Only a WCJ can approve a settlement, and the Civil Release is not enforceable before the WCAB.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
California Constitution Article XIV Section 4; Labor Code section 5300
The WCAB has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate workers' compensation disputes pursuant to the California Constitution and Labor Code section 5300.
The WCAB retains jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes related to applicant's workers' compensation claims, including increased compensation claims under section 4553.
From the decision · page 6I. The question of jurisdiction was not an issue framed for trial, however, as the WCJ raised it, we will begin with the issue of jurisdiction. The Appeals Board has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate workers' compensation disputes pursuant to the California Constitution and section 5300. (Cal. Const. Art. XIV, § 4; Lab. Code, § 5300.) Article XIV, Section 4, of the California Constitution, provides in pertinent part that:
Labor Code section 5001
No release of liability or compromise agreement is valid unless approved by the WCJ under Labor Code section 5001.
The civil settlement was not approved by the WCJ and thus did not settle the claim for increased compensation under section 4553.
From the decision · page 8Pursuant to section 5001, no release of liability or compromise agreement is valid unless it is approved by the WCJ. (Lab. Code, § 5001.) Where the parties seek to settle both a civil action and a related worker's compensation claim at a superior court settlement conference, the civil settlement must be conditional upon WCAB approval. (Steller v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (2010) 189 Cal. App. 4th 175, 181 [75 Cal.Comp.Cases 1146].)
The legal principles governing compromise and release agreements apply to workers' compensation settlements.
The civil release explicitly excluded workers' compensation claims, so it did not settle the claim for increased compensation under section 4553.
From the decision · page 9The parties' intention should be ascertained, if possible, from the writing alone and, if an absurdity is not involved, the clear language of the contract governs its interpretation. (Civ. Code, § 1636, 1638, 1639; TRB Investments, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (2006) 40 Cal.4th 19, 27; County of San Joaquin v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Bd. (Sepulveda) (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 1180, 1184 [69 Cal.Comp.Cases 193].)
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.