ADJ10774501 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration denied by the WCAB panel on October 10, 2022.

Applicant sought reconsideration of the Findings & Award issued by the WCJ on July 14, 2022, which found injury AOE/COE and permanent disability; the WCJ deferred the LC 132a claim and temporary disability issues. The WCAB denied the petition for reconsideration.

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 WCJ properly deferred the section 132a claim and temporary disability issues as interlocutory matters, and the Board found no significant prejudice or irreparable harm to justify removal.

From the decision · page 4All remaining issues including the 132a claim, as well as the EDD lien and the TD issues are deferred at this time with WCAB jurisdiction reserved in the event the parties are not able to resolve these issues amongst themselves.

Medical treatment / UR / IMRApplicant prevailed

The facts that decided it

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

Applicant worked for the employer more than 6 months, satisfying the requirement for psychiatric injury claim under LC 3208.3(d).

Favours Applicant prevailed

This fact allowed the Board to find the psychiatric injury industrially compensable.

From the decision · page 3However, Applicant credibly testified at trial that although she was hired in July of 2016, she was not terminated from employment until 4/6/2017 as follows:

The orthopedic AME Dr. Renbaum's report provided substantial medical evidence supporting a 23% permanent disability rating.

Favours Applicant prevailed

The Board relied on this report to affirm the permanent disability rating.

From the decision · page 4This Court has carefully read all of the medical legal evidence that has been properly admitted into evidence in this case. After careful consideration of the record, this Court believes that the analysis and conclusions of the orthopedic AME Dr. Renbaum taken as a whole constitute substantial medical evidence on the issue of permanent disability.

The WCJ's deferral of the section 132a claim and temporary disability issues was within authority and did not cause significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This supported denial of removal and upheld the deferral.

From the decision · page 6A WCJ has broad authority to issue orders to ensure proper adjudication of each claim, including "any interim, interlocutory and final orders, findings, decisions and awards as may be necessary to the full adjudication of the case." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10330.) This includes the authority to defer issues that the trier of fact determines are not ripe for adjudication. (See e.g., Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10787(a) [the WCJ may bifurcate the issues for trial and try them separately upon a showing of good cause].) It was consequently within the WCJ's authority to defer the issues of applicant's section 132a claim and the EDD lien.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Labor Code section 3208.3(d)

Labor Code section 3208.3(d) bars psychiatric injury claims if employment is less than 6 months.

Applicant was found to have worked more than 6 months, so psychiatric injury claim was allowed.

From the decision · page 3LC 3208.3(d) bars applicant from claiming a psychiatric industrial injury if she has worked for the employer for less than 6 months. These 6 months need not be continuous. Defendant argues that applicant has not met this 6-month rule since she was hired on 7/8/2016 and she was injured on 8/3/2016, after only a little over one month of employment.

Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(1)

Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(1) limits permanent disability ratings for psychiatric injuries post 1/1/2013 but allows medical treatment.

Applicant was not entitled to increased permanent disability for psychiatric injury but was entitled to medical treatment.

From the decision · page 3"... the [permanent disability] impairment ratings for... psychiatric disorder, arising out of a compensable physical injury shall not increase."

California Code of Regulations, title 8, sections 10330 and 10787(a)

WCJ has broad authority to defer interlocutory issues including section 132a claims and temporary disability.

The WCJ properly deferred these issues as interlocutory matters without causing significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

From the decision · page 6A WCJ has broad authority to issue orders to ensure proper adjudication of each claim, including "any interim, interlocutory and final orders, findings, decisions and awards as may be necessary to the full adjudication of the case." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10330.) This includes the authority to defer issues that the trier of fact determines are not ripe for adjudication. (See e.g., Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10787(a) [the WCJ may bifurcate the issues for trial and try them separately upon a showing of good cause].) It was consequently within the WCJ's authority to defer the issues of applicant's section 132a claim and the EDD lien.

ADJ10774501 · October 10, 2022

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

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

The facts that decided it

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page