What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration granted; Notice of Intention to Rescind the arbitrator's decision issued.
Petition for Reconsideration granted by the WCAB panel on November 25, 2024, rescinding the September 21, 2023 arbitrator's decision unless a complete record is filed within 30 days.
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 petition for reconsideration was timely filed despite defective service, and the Appeals Board's failure to act within 60 days was due to administrative error, justifying equitable tolling and granting reconsideration.
From the decision · page 1Defendant Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact (Findings) issued by a workers' compensation arbitrator (WCA) on September 21, 2023, wherein the WCA found that the date of injury in this matter for the purposes of Labor Code1 section 5500.5 liability is May 13, 2009 through May 13, 2010 in accordance with orthopedic agreed medical examiner Dr. Alexander Angerman. The WCA bifurcated the issue of actual amounts of contribution/reimbursement between the parties.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The WCA's Findings of Fact and minutes/transcript were not properly served upon defendant Travelers' attorneys at their official address, delaying their receipt until October 18, 2023.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This defective service delayed the start of the time limit for filing the petition for reconsideration, making the petition timely.
From the decision · page 4In this case, the WCA issued the Findings of Fact on September 21, 2023. Per the verified Petition by defendant Travelers' attorneys of record, Woolford Associates, both the Findings of Fact and minutes/transcript of the proceedings by the WCA were not properly served upon them at their official address of record in St. Paul, Minnesota, and they did not receive the minutes/transcript until it was requested on October 18, 2023.2 (Petition, p. 5; 10-14.)
The Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days due to administrative error in file transmission, not the fault of the parties.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This justified equitable tolling of the time to act on the petition, allowing reconsideration to be granted.
From the decision · page 5Accordingly, the Appeals Board failed to act on the petition within 60 days, through no fault of the parties. Under the circumstances stated above, the requirements for equitable tolling have been satisfied in this case. Thus, our time to act on defendant's petition was equitably tolled until 60 days after September 26, 2024, or by November 25, 2024. Because this decision is issued on or by November 25, 2024, our grant of reconsideration is timely, and we now issue our decision after reconsideration.
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
Orthopedic agreed medical examiner who provided the date of injury period as May 13, 2009 through May 13, 2010.
From the decision · page 1Defendant Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact (Findings) issued by a workers' compensation arbitrator (WCA) on September 21, 2023, wherein the WCA found that the date of injury in this matter for the purposes of Labor Code1 section 5500.5 liability is May 13, 2009 through May 13, 2010 in accordance with orthopedic agreed medical examiner Dr. Alexander Angerman. The WCA bifurcated the issue of actual amounts of contribution/reimbursement between the parties.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Lab. Code, §§ 112, 115, 5301, 5901, 5908.5, 5950
Only the Appeals Board is authorized to issue a decision on a petition for reconsideration and must conduct de novo review on the merits.
The Appeals Board reviewed the entire record and granted reconsideration based on equitable tolling due to administrative error in service and file transmission.
From the decision · page 2I. Only the Appeals Board is statutorily authorized to issue a decision on a petition for reconsideration. (Lab. Code, § 112, 115, 5301, 5901, 5908.5, 5950; see Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10320, 10330.) The Appeals Board must conduct de novo review as to the merits of the petition and review the entire proceedings in the case. (Lab. Code, § 5906, 5908; see Lab. Code, § 5301, 5315, 5701, 5911.) Once a final decision by the Appeals Board on the merits of the petition issues, the parties may seek review under section 5950, but appellate review is limited to review of the record certified by the Appeals Board. (Lab. Code, § 5901, 5951.) Former section 5909 provided that a petition was denied by operation of law if the Appeals Board did not "act on" the petition within 60 days of the petition's filing with the `appeals board' and not within 60 days of its filing at a DWC district office. A petition for reconsideration of an arbitrator's decision or award made pursuant to the mandatory or voluntary arbitration provisions of sections 5270 through 5275 shall be filed in EAMS or with the district office having venue in accordance with section 5501.5 so that the WCA may review the petition in the first instance and determine whether their decision is legally correct and based on substantial evidence.
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Defective service of the WCA's Findings of Fact to defendant Travelers' attorneys at their official address delayed their receipt of the minutes and transcript until October 18, 2023.
From the decision · page 4In this case, the WCA issued the Findings of Fact on September 21, 2023. Per the verified Petition by defendant Travelers' attorneys of record, Woolford Associates, both the Findings of Fact and minutes/transcript of the proceedings by the WCA were not properly served upon them at their official address of record in St. Paul, Minnesota, and they did not receive the minutes/transcript until it was requested on October 18, 2023.2 (Petition, p. 5; 10-14.)
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.