What the panel ordered
July 31, 2024 Joint Findings and Award rescinded; matter returned to WCJ to consider Compromise and Release and for further proceedings as appropriate.
Petition for Reconsideration filed by defendant regarding WCJ's July 31, 2024 decision; WCAB issued interim order granting petition and encouraged mediation; parties reached settlement and returned matter to WCJ for settlement review.
This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold November 7, 2024.
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 WCJ's findings on permanent disability and apportionment were not ruled on the merits because the parties settled and the matter was returned to the WCJ for settlement review.
From the decision · page 1Defendant filed a Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) of the Joint Findings of Fact and Award issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on July 31, 2024.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Parties reached a proposed settlement by Compromise and Release (C&R) and requested return to trial level for settlement review.
Favours neutral
This led to rescission of the July 31, 2024 Joint Findings and Award and return to WCJ for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 2On September 15, 2025, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by Compromise and Release (C&R) had been reached and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
California Labor Code
Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664
Regarding apportionment to applicant's various dates of injury
From the decision · page 1Petitioner contends that the WCJ erred in finding applicant to be 100 percent permanently totally disabled based upon the reporting of the PQME, as he failed to consider apportionment to applicant's various dates of injury under both Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664.
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.