What the panel ordered
The April 04, 2023 Findings and Order is rescinded and the matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
Petition for Reconsideration of the April 04, 2023 Findings and Order was granted for further review; matter returned to WCJ for settlement review 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The Board granted reconsideration to review the entire record and then rescinded the prior Findings and Order, returning the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the April 04, 2023 Findings and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therein, the WCJ found that applicant did not sustain injury to psyche in either ADJ10900742 or ADJ10900743.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The WCJ found that applicant did not sustain injury to psyche in either ADJ10900742 or ADJ10900743.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This finding was the basis for the Petition for Reconsideration and the Board's decision to rescind the prior Findings and Order.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the April 04, 2023 Findings and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therein, the WCJ found that applicant did not sustain injury to psyche in either ADJ10900742 or ADJ10900743.
The parties reached a proposed settlement by Stipulation and Order and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This led to the Board rescinding the prior Findings and Order and returning the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 1On June 01, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by Stipulation and Order had been reached and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
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.