SIMILARCASE

Loading

ADJ18188574 — California WCAB decision · SimilarCase

Sign in Sign up Try a case →

California WCABPanel decision

ADJ18188574 · January 14, 2025

Petition for Reconsideration granted; October 15, 2024 Findings and Order rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings.

Issues decided: 1
Medical opinions weighed: 0
Authorities named: 1
District office: Redding

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration granted; October 15, 2024 Findings and Order rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for Reconsideration filed by applicant after WCJ Findings and Order denying claim as barred by statute of limitations; WCAB grants reconsideration and returns matter to trial level for further proceedings.

Read the official 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.

Statute of limitationsApplicant prevailedpsyche · stress

The WCAB found that the statute of limitations issue required further development of the record, including medical legal evaluation to determine the date of injury and knowledge of disability, and that the prior WCJ decision barring the claim was premature without such findings.

From the decision · page 5Accordingly, we grant reconsideration and return this matter to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

Private workspace

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

Paste the dispute. The extractor builds the factors, the search finds the decisions the same facts won, and the matter stays saved. Free account.

Start a matter Search without an account →

Applicant filed claim on 8/1/2020 but canceled it shortly after and was advised of one-year statute of limitations from date of injury or last treatment.

Favours neutral

This established the timeline for the statute of limitations issue and the need to clarify the date of injury and knowledge of disability.

From the decision · page 2Applicant filed a claim form dated 8/1/2020 which was received by the employer on 8/13/2020 and by SCIF on 8/14/2020 as noted on the date stamp on the DWC-1 claim form (Defense Exhibit A, DWC-1 form dated 8/1/2020). On 8/18/2020, Applicant requested by email to "cancel" her claim because she was pursuing EDD benefits instead which had been her doctor's suggestion (See Defense Exhibit D, E-mail from Applicant dated 8/18/2020). On 8/20/2020 Defendant denied Applicant's injury claim and, in the denial letter to Applicant, advised that because she chose to cancel her claim, defendant was unable to investigate to determine compensability. Defendant also provided notice that Applicant had one year from the date of injury or date of last furnishing of indemnity or medical treatment to commence proceedings before the WCAB by filing an Application for Adjudication of Claim or her rights to benefits maybe lost (See Joint Exhibit 1, SCIF denial letter claim notice of date of injury 7/6/2020, dated 8/20/2020).

Applicant amended date of injury to cumulative trauma period 7/6/2020 to 11/16/2020 and alleged psychiatric injury from work.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This amendment required further development to determine the correct date of injury and knowledge under Labor Code 5412.

From the decision · page 2On 6/13/2024, Applicant amended the date of injury to reflect cumulative trauma during the period 7/6/2020-11/16/2020.

No medical records or findings on compensable disability or knowledge of industrial causation; only allegations of psychiatric injury causation by work.

Favours Applicant prevailed

Lack of medical evidence and findings on laches defense meant the statute of limitations issue was not properly resolved and required further proceedings.