ADJ11387661 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Findings of Fact issued May 7, 2021, rescinded; case returned to trial level for further proceedings

Petition for reconsideration granted; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings due to incomplete record and due process concerns

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 due process requires a complete and organized record for meaningful review, which was lacking; therefore, the Findings of Fact were rescinded and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

From the decision · page 1We granted reconsideration in order to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. This is our Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration.1

The facts that decided it

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

The arbitration file was never completed in EAMS as required by WCAB Rule 10995.

The rules the panel named

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

Barri v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 428

Due process requires meaningful consideration of the merits with a well-reasoned decision based on the evidentiary record and relevant law.

Due process was not satisfied due to incomplete record, necessitating rescission and remand.

From the decision · page 2The Appeals Board may not ignore due process for the sake of expediency. (Barri v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 428, 469 [83 Cal.Comp.Cases 1643] [claimants in workers' compensation proceedings are not denied due process when proceedings

Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473

An arbitrator's decision must be based on admitted evidence and supported by substantial evidence.

The incomplete record prevented meaningful review of the arbitrator's decision, requiring remand.

From the decision · page 3As with a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), an arbitrator's decision must be based on admitted evidence and must be supported by substantial evidence. (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (Hamilton) (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 476 (Appeals Board en banc).) Meaningful review of an arbitrator's decision requires that the "decision be based on an ascertainable and adequate record," including "an orderly identification in the record of the evidence submitted by a party; and what evidence is admitted or denied admission." (Lewis v. Arlie Rogers & Sons (2003) 69 Cal.Comp.Cases 490, 494, emphasis in original.) "An organized evidentiary record assists an arbitrator in rendering a decision, informs the parties what evidence will be utilized by the arbitrator in making a determination, preserves the rights of parties to object to proffered evidence, and affords meaningful review by the Board, or reviewing tribunal." (Id.; see also Evans v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1968) 68 Cal.2d 753 [a full and complete record allows for a meaningful right of reconsideration].)

ADJ11387661 · July 24, 2024

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

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

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page