What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration denied.
Petition for reconsideration treated as such and denied by the Appeals Board panel.
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 and Appeals Board found that the applicant sustained an industrial psychological injury predominantly caused (80%) by actual events of employment, supported by medical opinion of Dr. Davis and legal standards requiring predominant causation by work events.
From the decision · page 22Based on the medical reporting and the opinions of the regularly appointed physician, Dr. Davis, the applicant's industrial injury, the aggravation of her pre-existing psychological condition, was predominantly caused, 80%, by the actual events of her employment with the defendant.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Dr. Davis's medical opinion that 80% of the applicant's psychological injury was caused by work events.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This medical opinion was relied upon by the WCJ and Appeals Board to find the injury industrial and predominantly caused by employment.
From the decision · page 21Dr Davis stated that "[i]t is within reasonable medical probability that 80% of the active causation of the worsening of the examinee's Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Panic Disorder was due to the work events listed in... November 18, 2022 Order Appointing Regular Physician." Dr Davis further stated that "[i] is within reasonable medical probability that 20% of the worsening of the examinee's psychiatric illnesses was caused by concomitant personal stress."
The legal requirement that the injury's causation be predominantly work-related (more than 50%).
Favours Applicant prevailed
The Board applied this legal standard to conclude the 80% causation by work events satisfies the predominant cause requirement.
From the decision · page 22The courts have interpreted the phrase "predominant as to all causes" as a requirement that more than 50 percent of the injury's causation must be work-related.49
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. Davis opined that 80% of the worsening of the applicant's major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and panic disorder was due to work events, with 20% due to personal stress. He apportioned causation among various harassment and personnel actions at work.
Dr. Davis's medical opinion was relied upon by the WCJ and Appeals Board to find predominant causation of the psychological injury by work events.
From the decision · page 21Dr Davis stated that "[i]t is within reasonable medical probability that 80% of the active causation of the worsening of the examinee's Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Panic Disorder was due to the work events listed in... November 18, 2022 Order Appointing Regular Physician." Dr Davis further stated that "[i] is within reasonable medical probability that 20% of the worsening of the examinee's psychiatric illnesses was caused by concomitant personal stress."
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
California Labor Code Section 3208.3(b)(1)
California Labor Code Section 3208.3(b)(1) requires showing that actual events of employment predominantly caused the psychological injury.
The Board applied this statute to find the applicant's psychological injury was predominantly caused by work events.
From the decision · page 22California Labor Code Section 3208.3(b)(1) requires a showing that the actual events of employment predominantly caused an applicant's psychological injury.
Department of Corrections v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 810
Predominant cause means more than 50% of the injury's causation must be work-related.
The Board applied this standard to find that 80% causation by work events meets the predominant cause requirement.
From the decision · page 22The courts have interpreted the phrase "predominant as to all causes" as a requirement that more than 50 percent of the injury's causation must be work-related.49
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Credibility of Dr. Davis's medical opinion on causation
From the decision · page 22Based on the medical reporting and the opinions of the regularly appointed physician, Dr. Davis, the applicant's industrial injury, the aggravation of her pre-existing psychological condition, was predominantly caused, 80%, by the actual events of her employment with the defendant.
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.