Lab. Code § 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. App. Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627; Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473 (en banc)
Any award, order or decision of the Appeals Board must be supported by substantial evidence in light of the entire record.
The Appeals Board found the record lacked substantial evidence to adjudicate the issues and remanded for further development.
From the decision · page 4DISCUSSION
We must first point out that it is well established that any award, order or decision of the
Appeals Board must be supported by substantial evidence in light of the entire record. (Lab. Code,
§ 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274, 281 [39 Cal.Comp.Cases
310]; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. App. Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312, 317-319 [33 Cal.Comp.Cases
500]; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627, 635-637 [35
Cal.Comp.Cases 16.) Decisions of the Appeals Board "must be based on admitted evidence in the
record." (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 476 (Appeals Board
en banc).) When deciding whether an applicant sustained a cumulative trauma injury, the decision
must be based on an expert medical opinion. (See Insurance Company of North America v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kemp) (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 905 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 913].)
In this matter, in addition to his psychiatric injury claim, applicant claimed injury to his
"back, and trunk." At his depositions, applicant testified several times regarding his orthopedic
symptoms. (See App.
Lab. Code §§ 5701, 5906; Kuykendall v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 396; McClune v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1117; Tyler v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 389
The WCJ and the Appeals Board have a duty to further develop the record when it does not contain substantial evidence pertaining to a threshold issue.
The Appeals Board remanded for further development of the record to properly adjudicate the issues.
From the decision · page 5The WCJ and the Appeals Board have a duty to further develop the record when the record
does not contain substantial evidence pertaining to a threshold issue, or when it is necessary in
order to adjudicate the issues submitted for decision. (Lab. Code § 5701, 5906; Kuykendall v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 396 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 264]; McClune v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1117 [63 Cal.Comp.Cases 261]; Tyler v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 389 [62 Cal.Comp.Cases 924].)