What the panel ordered
The Board granted the Petition for Reconsideration, rescinded the Findings of Fact and Order of September 16, 2025, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.
Applicant sought reconsideration of the Findings of Fact and Order of September 16, 2025, which denied her claim for industrial injury to psyche; the WCJ found the defendant's witnesses more credible and medical evidence insufficient; the Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the F&O, and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
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 failed to properly analyze whether workplace incidents were actual events of employment and the medical opinion was insufficient as it did not break down causation percentages and ignored more credible employer witness testimony; further medical development was required.
From the decision · page 8In the instant case, the WCJ did not address whether the workplace incidents were actual events of employment. (Lab. Code § 3208.3(b)(1); Rolda v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., supra, 66 Cal. Comp. Cases at pp. 245-247.) Therefore, the WCJ must perform a proper analysis of the psych claim.