What the panel ordered
The WCAB granted reconsideration to defer the issues of accrued temporary disability benefits owed at applicant's death and attorney fees, affirmed the WCJ's decision otherwise, and deferred liens and medical-legal expenses with jurisdiction reserved.
Defendant sought reconsideration of the Findings, Award and Order issued on March 10, 2025 by the WCJ; the WCJ had found the AME report by Dr. Richard Siebold not substantial evidence and deferred liability for the report's cost; the WCJ found no permanent disability indemnity owed as applicant died before permanent and stationary status; awarded accrued temporary disability indemnity less attorney fees; deferred liens and medical-legal expenses; the WCAB granted reconsideration to defer accrued temporary disability and attorney fees issues to avoid due process violation, otherwise affirmed the WCJ 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.
The WCAB found that the issue of accrued temporary disability benefits and attorney fees was not identified for trial, and adjudicating it without notice would violate due process. Therefore, the issue was deferred to avoid due process violation.
From the decision · page 5Here, it appears that defendant reasonably relied on the pre-trial conference statement and the discussions at the time of trial to determine what issues it would need to defend at trial. Consequently, we cannot interpose our own findings on the specific issue of accrued and owing temporary disability, which was not identified as an issue pending at the time of the pre-trial conference statement or as an issue for adjudication at the time of trial. Under these circumstances, we cannot "do justice" as applicant argues, by interposing our own findings on the issue of accrued and unpaid temporary disability without violating the parties' rights to due process. (Gangwish v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 1284, 1295 [66 Cal.Comp.Cases 584] citing Rucker, supra, 82 Cal.App.4th at pp. 157-158).