What the panel ordered
The Appeals Board affirmed the Findings and Order of March 23, 2020, denying defendant's petition for reconsideration.
Defendant filed a petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's Findings and Order of March 23, 2020, which was granted by the Appeals Board to study the factual and legal issues.
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 found that the applicant's bladder cancer began developing during his active employment period, entitling him to the presumption of industrial causation under Labor Code section 3212.1, despite the cancer manifesting after the statutory extension period.
From the decision · page 1In the Findings and Order of March 23, 2020, the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found that applicant, while employed as a police officer by the City of Torrance during the period May 20, 1982 through March 6, 2003, sustained industrial injury in the form of bladder cancer. The WCJ also found that the injury is presumptively industrial pursuant to Labor Code section 3212.1, that defendant failed to rebut the presumption of industrial causation under section 3212.1, and that the date of injury for purposes of Labor Code section 5412 is September 25, 2018.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant's bladder cancer began developing in August 1998 during his active employment period, as found by unrebutted medical opinion of Dr. Majcher.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This fact established entitlement to the presumption of industrial causation under Labor Code section 3212.1 despite the cancer manifesting after the statutory extension period.
From the decision · page 8In deciding this matter, the Court was presented with evidence by AME Dr. Stanley Majcher that the type of cancer that developed in applicant has a latency period of twenty years. (Exhibit D, page 6 line 13 thorough). Based on Dr. Majcher's unrebutted opinion, the undersigned found that applicant's bladder cancer would have begun developing in August of 1998.
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.
Dr. Majcher opined that the latency period for bladder cancer is 20 years and that the applicant's bladder cancer began developing in August 1998, during his active employment period, supporting the presumption of industrial causation.
The opinion was unrebutted and relied upon by the WCJ and Appeals Board to determine the timing of cancer development relative to employment.
From the decision · page 4matter, the latency period for bladder cancer is 20 years. (Petition for Reconsideration at 2:10-12;
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 3212.1
Labor Code section 3212.1 presumption of industrial causation of cancer
The presumption applies when cancer develops or manifests during active service or within the statutory extension period, shifting the burden to the defendant to rebut.
From the decision · page 1In the Findings and Order of March 23, 2020, the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found that applicant, while employed as a police officer by the City of Torrance during the period May 20, 1982 through March 6, 2003, sustained industrial injury in the form of bladder cancer. The WCJ also found that the injury is presumptively industrial pursuant to Labor Code section 3212.1, that defendant failed to rebut the presumption of industrial causation under section 3212.1, and that the date of injury for purposes of Labor Code section 5412 is September 25, 2018.
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Unrebutted medical opinion of Dr. Majcher regarding the 20-year latency period for bladder cancer and timing of cancer development.
From the decision · page 8In deciding this matter, the Court was presented with evidence by AME Dr. Stanley Majcher that the type of cancer that developed in applicant has a latency period of twenty years. (Exhibit D, page 6 line 13 thorough). Based on Dr. Majcher's unrebutted opinion, the undersigned found that applicant's bladder cancer would have begun developing in August of 1998.
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.