What the panel ordered
Findings and Award issued on November 21, 2022, rescinded; matter remanded to WCJ to consider stipulations with request for award and further proceedings as deemed appropriate.
Applicant petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the WCJ on November 21, 2022, which found 71% permanent partial disability; the WCJ recommended granting reconsideration and further development of the medical record; the Appeals Board granted reconsideration on February 6, 2023, and after settlement stipulations were filed, rescinded the November 21, 2022 Findings and Award and remanded to the WCJ for consideration of the stipulations and further proceedings.
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 WCJ found 71% permanent partial disability, but applicant contended for permanent total disability; the Appeals Board rescinded the partial disability award and remanded for further consideration of settlement stipulations.
From the decision · page 1applicant, petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on November 21, 2022. In that decision, the WCJ found that applicant sustained permanent partial disability of 71% as a result of his industrial injury.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
WCJ found applicant sustained 71% permanent partial disability in Findings and Award dated November 21, 2022.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This finding was the basis for the applicant's petition for reconsideration.
From the decision · page 1applicant, petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on November 21, 2022. In that decision, the WCJ found that applicant sustained permanent partial disability of 71% as a result of his industrial injury.
Applicant contended that he was permanently totally disabled and not partially disabled.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This contention was the basis for the petition for reconsideration and the Appeals Board's decision to rescind and remand.
From the decision · page 1Applicant contends in his petition for reconsideration that the WCJ erred in failing to find that applicant was permanently totally disabled and requests the WCJs decision be reversed and the Appeals Board find that applicant is permanently totally disabled based upon a total loss of future earning capacity and lack of amenability to vocational rehabilitation.
Parties filed a fully executed Stipulations with Request for Award as final settlement on June 29, 2023.
Favours neutral
This settlement prompted the Appeals Board to rescind the prior Findings and Award and remand for consideration of the stipulations.
From the decision · page 2Subsequently, the parties participated in a commissioners' settlement conference at our request. On June 29, 2023, the parties filed a fully executed Stipulations with Request for Award as final settlement of the dispute.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code
Labor Code
Applied to permanent disability determination.
From the decision · page 1applicant, petitioned for reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on November 21, 2022. In that decision, the WCJ found that applicant sustained permanent partial disability of 71% as a result of his industrial injury.
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.