Where this sits
- Title 8. Industrial Relations
- Division 1. Department of Industrial Relations
- Chapter 1.
- Division of Workers' Compensation -- Qualified Medical Evaluator Regulations
- Article 3. Assignment of Qualified Medical Evaluators, Evaluation Procedure
The regulation, as printed
The statute above this rule
Every regulation names the Labor Code it was written under. This is where the two halves of the law meet.
ImplementsLabor Code § 4060Labor Code § 4061Labor Code § 4062Labor Code § 4062.1Labor Code § 4062.2Labor Code § 4062.3Labor Code § 4064Labor Code § 4067
Authority and history
Note: Authority cited: Sections 133, 139.2 and 5307.3, Labor Code. Reference: Sections 139.2, 4060, 4061, 4062, 4062.1, 4062.2, 4062.3, 4064 and 4067, Labor Code.
1. New section filed 8-1-94; operative 8-31-94 (Register 94, No. 31). 2. New subsection (c) and subsection relettering, amendment of newly designated subsections (d) and (e) and new subsection (f) filed 8-23-96; operative 9-22-96 (Register 96, No. 34). 3. New subsection (b)(3) and amendment of subsection (e) filed 4-14-2000; operative 5-14-2000 (Register 2000, No. 15). 4. Amendment of section heading, section and Note filed 1-13-2009; operative 2-17-2009 (Register 2009, No. 3). 5. Amendment of subsections (a)(4) and (b)(1) filed 12-31-2012 as an emergency; operative 1-1-2013 pursuant to Government Code section 11346.1(d) (Register 2013, No. 1). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 7-1-2013 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 6. Amendment of subsections (a)(4) and (b)(1) refiled 7-1-2013 as an emergency; operative 7-1-2013 (Register 2013, No. 27). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 9-30-2013 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 7. Certificate of Compliance as to 7-1-2013 order, including amendment of subsections (a)(3)-(4), transmitted to OAL 8-2-2013 and filed 9-16-2013; amendments operative 9-16-2013 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(b)(3) (Register 2013, No. 38). 8. Amendment of subsections (a), (b)(2) and (i) filed 2-26-2024; operative 2-26-2024 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(b)(3) (Register 2024, No. 9).
What panels did with this rule
Released decisions that named § 35, with the passage each turned on. A panel decision persuades; it does not bind.
- ADJ19297551 · 2025-08-11 · San Francisco District Office8 CCR § 35
Determinative passage · p.11The Findings and Order that Dr. Tarin's pathology report could not be provided to the QME was based on the WCJ's interpretation of the provisions of AD Rule 35(e), as well as WCAB Rule 10682(b), and section 4605. (Opinion, at pp. 5-10; Report, at pp. 9-13.) As discussed briefly below, these provisions do not support the WCJ's conclusion. The WCJ found applicant did not carry her burden of proof to establish that the report in question is a consulting physician's report. (F&O, at p. 2, finding 5.) If this were correct, then AD Rule 35(e)(2) would be inapplicable, as this provision only applies to consulting physician's opinions. Here, the record demonstrates that Dr. Tarin was not appointed as a QME and was not the applicant's treating physician as his record review and report occurred after the applicant's death. The record demonstrates, too, that Dr. Tarin was not "an evaluator through the medical-legal process in Labor Code sections 4060 through 4062." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35(e)(2).) Rather, his role as a pathologist retained to render a post-mortem medical opinion on causation of injury more likely indicates that he was a consulting physician. We observe that a regulation such as AD Rule 35(e) may not be evoked in such a way as to defeat the plain meaning of the statute.
The WCJ's exclusion of Dr. Tarin's report based on AD Rule 35(e) was rejected by the Appeals Board as inconsistent with the statute and facts.
Official decision · page 11 → - ADJ12181367 · 2025-01-15 · Marina Del Rey District Office8 CCR § 35
Determinative passage · p.5California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 35, subdivision (a) allows for the provision to the AME of "non-medical records, including films and video-tapes, which are relevant to the determination of medical issue(s) in dispute, after compliance with subdivision 35(c)." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35(a)(5).) Subdivision (c) of the same regulation, meanwhile, provides that the party seeking to provide such non-medical records shall serve the evidence on the opposing party at least 20 days prior to providing it to the evaluator. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35(c).) Subdivision (d) allows the opposing party 10 days to object to the provision of the records, in which case the
Applied to determine procedural requirements for serving and objecting to sub rosa video evidence.
Official decision · page 5 → - ADJ11443278 · 2023-08-21 · Santa Rosa District Office8 CCR § 35
Determinative passage · p.5If, as asserted by applicant, Dr. McCoy did not timely prepare and/or submit his initial medical-legal report, it was appropriate for applicant to request a replacement panel and for applicant to be examined by QME Dr. Ciepiela. However, Administrative Director Rule 35, subsection (e) states that, "In no event shall any party forward to the evaluator: (1) any medical/legal report which has been rejected by a party as untimely pursuant to Labor Code section 4062.5" (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35.)
Prohibits forwarding medical/legal reports rejected as untimely to the evaluator.
Official decision · page 5 → - ADJ11024968 · 2022-02-25 · Van Nuys District Office8 CCR § 35
Determinative passage · p.5The Appeals Board shall retain jurisdiction in all cases to determine disputes arising from objections and whether ex parte contact in violation of Labor Code section 4062.3 or this section of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations has occurred. If any party communicates with an evaluator in violation of Labor Code section 4062.3, the Medical Director shall provide the aggrieved party with a new panel in which to select a new QME or the aggrieved party may elect to proceed with the original evaluator. Oral or written communications by the employee, or if the employee is deceased by the employee's dependent, made in the course of the examination or made at the request of the evaluator in connection with the examination shall not provide grounds for a new evaluator
The WCAB applied these standards to determine that the QME's post-examination phone calls with applicant were permissible and did not constitute impermissible ex parte communication.
Official decision · page 5 →
Rules beside this one
Article 3. Assignment of Qualified Medical Evaluators, Evaluation Procedure — regulations rarely stand alone, and the answer is often two sections away.
- § 34Appointment Notification and Cancellation.2 decisions
- § 34.1The Appointment Notification Form. [Repealed]
- § 35.5Compliance by AMEs and QMEs with Administrative Director Evaluation and Reporting Guidelines.8 decisions
- § 36Service of Comprehensive Medical-Legal Evaluation Reports by Medical Evaluators Including Reports Under Labor Code Section 4061.1 decisions
- § 36.1The Qualified or Agreed Medical Evaluator's Findings Summary Form.
- § 36.5Service of Comprehensive Medical/Legal Report in Claims of Injury to the Psyche.