ADJ11545044 · January 21, 2026

The petition failed to show specific facts establishing bias or an unqualified opinion that could not be changed, and the WCJ's opinions were based on evidence and law, not bias.

From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks disqualification of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon general allegations that the WCJ is biased.

The petition for disqualification did not set forth specific facts constituting grounds for disqualification, only general allegations of bias.

Favours Defendant prevailed

Without specific factual allegations, there was no issue of fact to determine bias or prejudice.

From the decision · page 2stating in detail facts establishing one or more of the grounds for disqualification...." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10960, italics added.) It has long been recognized that "[t]he allegations in a statement charging bias and prejudice of a judge must set forth specifically the facts on which the charge is predicated," that "[a] statement containing nothing but conclusions and setting forth no facts constituting a ground for disqualification may be ignored," and that "[w]here no facts are set forth in the statement there is no issue of fact to be determined." (Mackie v. Dyer (1957) 154 Cal.App.2d 395, 399.)

The WCJ's opinions were based on evidence and law and were not fixed opinions that could not be changed upon further hearing.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This showed the WCJ did not have an unqualified opinion as to the merits that would require disqualification.

From the decision · page 2Furthermore, even if detailed and verified allegations of fact have been made, it is settled law that a WCJ is not subject to disqualification under section 641(f) if, prior to rendering a decision, the WCJ expresses an opinion regarding a legal or factual issue but the petitioner fails to show that this opinion is a fixed one that could not be changed upon the production of evidence and the presentation of arguments at or after further hearing. (Taylor v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Thomas) (1940) 38 Cal.App.2d 75, 79§ 80 [5 Cal.Comp.Cases 61].) Additionally, even if the WCJ expresses an unqualified opinion on the merits, the WCJ is not subject to disqualification under section 641(f) if that opinion is "based upon the evidence then before [the WCJ] and upon the [WCJ's] conception of the law as applied to such evidence." (Id.; cf. Kreling v. Superior Court (1944) 25 Cal.2d 305, 312 ["It is [a judge's] duty to consider and pass upon the evidence produced before him, and when the evidence is in conflict, to resolve that conflict in favor of the party whose evidence outweighs that of the opposing party."].)

Expressions of opinion by the WCJ in the discharge of official duties are not evidence of bias or prejudice under the law.

Favours Defendant prevailed

This legal principle supported denial of the disqualification petition.

From the decision · page 2Also, it is "well settled... that the expressions of opinion uttered by a judge, in what he conceives to be a discharge of his official duties, are not evidence of bias or prejudice" under section 641(g) (Kreling, supra, 25 Cal.2d at pp. 310§ 311; accord: Mackie, supra, 154 Cal.App.2d at p. 400) and that "[e]rroneous rulings against a litigant, even when numerous and continuous, form no ground for a charge of bias or prejudice, especially when they are subject to review." (McEwen v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. (1916) 172 Cal. 6, 11; accord: Mackie, supra, 154 Cal.App.2d at p. 400 (emphasis added).) Similarly, "when the state of mind of the trial judge appears to be adverse to one of the parties but is based upon actual observance of the witnesses and the evidence

Labor Code section 5311; Code of Civil Procedure section 641; WCAB Rule 10960

A party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641, including bias or an unqualified opinion on the merits.

The Board applied these standards to evaluate the petition for disqualification and found no grounds to disqualify the WCJ.

From the decision · page 1Labor Code1 section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (§ 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has "formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action" (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated "[t]he existence of a state of mind... evincing enmity against or bias toward either party." (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)).