ADJ7442612 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration granted; final decision after reconsideration deferred pending further review and status conference ordered

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.

Reconsideration / removalRemanded

The Appeals Board found that the lien claimant's petition raised substantial legal and procedural issues that were not properly addressed by the WCJ, including compliance with lien declaration requirements and the validity of the request for authorization, warranting reconsideration and further development of the record.

From the decision · page 1Lien claimant Nogales Psychological Counseling seeks reconsideration and removal of the July 27, 2023 Joint Findings and Order (F&O), wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found in relevant part that there was no valid appointment of a treating physician; that there were no valid requests for authorization (RFAs) issued by any physician; that there was no compliance with Labor Code1 section 4903.8 [sic]; that defendants were denied the right to control medical treatment; and that there was no referral by Dr. Black/Grand Chiropractic to lien claimant Nogales Psychological Counseling. The WCJ ordered in relevant part that lien claimant take nothing by way of its lien and dismissed the lien for failure to comply with section 4903.8 [sic].

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Lab. Code, §§ 5903, 5952(d); Braewood Convalescent Hospital v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Bolton) (1983) 34 Cal.3d 159

Substantial evidence standard for WCAB decisions

The Appeals Board emphasized the need for decisions to be supported by substantial evidence and for the record to be adequately developed to support findings.

From the decision · page 4It is well established that decisions by the Appeals Board must be supported by substantial evidence. (Lab. Code, § 5903, 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274 [39 Cal.Comp.Cases 310]; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500]; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 16].) "The term `substantial evidence' means evidence which, if true, has probative force on the issues. It is more than a mere scintilla, and means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion...It must be reasonable in nature, credible, and of solid value." (Braewood Convalescent Hospital v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Bolton) (1983) 34 Cal.3d 159, 164 [48 Cal.Comp.Cases 566], emphasis removed and citations omitted.)

Lab. Code, §§ 5907, 5908, 5908.5, 5803, 5901

WCAB continuing jurisdiction and authority to rescind or amend orders

The Appeals Board cited its continuing jurisdiction to reconsider and amend prior orders and decisions, including the power to make new findings on issues not raised in the petition.

From the decision · page 5II. We conclude by observing that under our broad grant of authority, our jurisdiction over this matter is continuing. A grant of reconsideration has the effect of causing "the whole subject matter [to be] reopened for further consideration and determination" (Great Western Power Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Savercool) (1923) 191 Cal. 724, 729 [10 I.A.C. 322]) and of "[throwing] the entire record open for review." (State Comp. Ins. Fund v. Industrial Acc. Com. (George) (1954) 125 Cal.App.2d 201, 203 [19 Cal.Comp.Cases 98].) Thus, once reconsideration has been granted, the Appeals Board has the full power to make new and different findings on issues presented for determination at the trial level, even with respect to issues not raised in the petition for reconsideration before it. (See Lab. Code, § 5907, 5908, 5908.5; see also Earley v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 1, 13-15 [88 Cal.Comp.Cases 769] [the Appeals Board has the authority to issue a final decision when it grants reconsideration but is not required to do so]; see generally Lab. Code, § 5803 ["The WCAB has continuing jurisdiction over its orders,

ADJ7442612 · October 17, 2023

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

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

The facts that decided it

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page