What the panel ordered
Decision of August 7, 2019 rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings and decision by WCJ
Matter pending on reconsideration; parties reached a proposed settlement; decision rescinded and returned to trial level for WCJ to consider settlement
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The Appeals Board rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the trial level to allow the WCJ to consider the proposed settlement, as the District Office is precluded from acting while the matter is pending on reconsideration.
From the decision · page 1It has come to the attention of the Appeals Board that, while this matter has been pending on reconsideration, the parties have reached a proposed settlement.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Parties reached a proposed settlement while the matter was pending on reconsideration
Favours neutral
This prompted the Appeals Board to rescind the prior decision and return the matter to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the settlement.
From the decision · page 1It has come to the attention of the Appeals Board that, while this matter has been pending on reconsideration, the parties have reached a proposed settlement.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, former 10859, now 10961 (eff. Jan. 1, 2020)
District Office is precluded from acting on a case while it is pending on reconsideration
To permit review by the WCJ of the proposed settlement, the Appeals Board rescinded the decision and returned the matter to the trial level.
From the decision · page 1Since the District Office is precluded from acting on a case while it is pending on reconsideration (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, former § 10859, now § 10961 (eff. Jan. 1, 2020)), in order to permit review by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) of the proposed settlement, we will rescind the decision from which reconsideration is sought and return this matter to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the proposed settlement. If the WCJ does not approve the settlement, the WCJ may issue an order reinstating the original decision and any aggrieved person may timely seek reconsideration from the reinstated decision. This is not a final decision on the merits of any of the issues pending on reconsideration.
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.