ADJ20105844 · March 13, 2026

The Appeals Board does not have jurisdiction over the third party or the disbursement of third-party settlement funds absent an agreement approved by the WCAB; the issue of credit for third-party settlement funds is within WCAB jurisdiction and was deferred by the WCJ.

From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration or in the alternative removal of the "Findings and Order" (F&O) issued on January 5, 2026, by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found that the Appeals Board did not have jurisdiction to act upon the disbursement of funds from a third-party settlement check.

The Appeals Board does not have jurisdiction over the third party or the disbursement of third-party settlement funds absent an agreement approved by the WCAB.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This limits the Appeals Board's jurisdiction to enforce provisions related to third-party settlements and requires civil court action for disputes involving third parties.

From the decision · page 4over the third party because relief against the third party tortfeasor may only be brought as a civil action. Only the civil court has jurisdiction to determine how the settlement between applicant and the third party is carried out, and any dispute would be a question for the court of appropriate jurisdiction to decide. Pursuant to section 3850 et seq., applicant's remedy is to file a civil action against the third party.

The record was minimal and devoid of facts necessary to support the WCJ's decision on jurisdiction.

Favours Applicant prevailed

An adequate and complete record is necessary for the Appeals Board to act on jurisdictional issues; the lack of such a record led to rescission and remand.

From the decision · page 3II. Decisions of the Appeals Board "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (Hamilton) (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 476 (Appeals Board en banc).) Furthermore, decisions of the Appeals Board must be supported by substantial evidence. (Lab. Code1, § 5903, 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274 [39 Cal.Comp.Cases 310]; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500]; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 16].) An adequate and complete record is necessary to understand the basis for the WCJ's decision. (§ 5313; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10761; see Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10151 [judgment on the pleadings not permitted].) Here, the record is devoid of the facts that are alleged in the parties' various Petitions. If the parties agree upon the facts, they may enter into stipulations of fact to assist in resolving a dispute. Absent stipulations of fact, a record must be created. Next, and to the extent that the parties question the WCAB's jurisdiction over their dispute, it appears that the WCJ correctly advised the parties that the WCAB does not have jurisdiction

The case was transmitted to the Appeals Board on January 26, 2026, and the petition for reconsideration was acted upon within the 60-day period.

Favours Applicant prevailed

This procedural compliance supports the granting of the petition for reconsideration and the rescission of the prior Findings and Order.

From the decision · page 2Under section 5909(a), the Appeals Board must act on a petition for reconsideration within 60 days of transmission of the case to the Appeals Board. Transmission is reflected in Events in the Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS). Specifically, in Case Events, under Event Description is the phrase "Sent to Recon" and under Additional Information is the phrase "The case is sent to the Recon board."

Lab. Code, § 5909

Petition for reconsideration must be acted upon within 60 days of transmission to the Appeals Board.

The case was transmitted to the Appeals Board on January 26, 2026, and the petition was acted upon within the 60-day period.

From the decision · page 2I. Former section 5909 provided that a petition for reconsideration was deemed denied unless the Appeals Board acted on the petition within 60 days from the date of filing. (Lab. Code, § 5909.) Effective July 2, 2024, section 5909 was amended to state in relevant part that:

Lab. Code §§ 5903, 5952(d); Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473; Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627

Appeals Board decisions must be based on admitted evidence and supported by substantial evidence.

The record was minimal and devoid of facts necessary to support the WCJ's decision; an adequate record is required for jurisdictional determinations.

From the decision · page 3II. Decisions of the Appeals Board "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (Hamilton) (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 476 (Appeals Board en banc).) Furthermore, decisions of the Appeals Board must be supported by substantial evidence. (Lab. Code1, § 5903, 5952(d); Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 274 [39 Cal.Comp.Cases 310]; Garza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.3d 312 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 500]; LeVesque v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 627 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 16].) An adequate and complete record is necessary to understand the basis for the WCJ's decision. (§ 5313; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10761; see Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10151 [judgment on the pleadings not permitted].) Here, the record is devoid of the facts that are alleged in the parties' various Petitions. If the parties agree upon the facts, they may enter into stipulations of fact to assist in resolving a dispute. Absent stipulations of fact, a record must be created. Next, and to the extent that the parties question the WCAB's jurisdiction over their dispute, it appears that the WCJ correctly advised the parties that the WCAB does not have jurisdiction

Lab. Code, § 3850 et seq.

The WCAB does not have jurisdiction over third parties; relief against third parties must be brought as a civil action.

The WCAB correctly advised that only civil courts have jurisdiction over third-party settlements and disbursements absent an agreement approved by the WCAB.

From the decision · page 4over the third party because relief against the third party tortfeasor may only be brought as a civil action. Only the civil court has jurisdiction to determine how the settlement between applicant and the third party is carried out, and any dispute would be a question for the court of appropriate jurisdiction to decide. Pursuant to section 3850 et seq., applicant's remedy is to file a civil action against the third party.

Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10109

A reasonable investigation must be conducted to timely provide benefits.

Defendant is reminded to promptly file a petition for credit if seeking credit from third-party settlement funds.

From the decision · page 5Upon return, we encourage the parties to negotiate this issue in good faith. Absent an agreement, and if defendant is seeking a credit from third-party settlement funds, defendant should promptly file a petition for credit. Defendant is reminded that: "A reasonable investigation must attempt to obtain the information needed to determine and timely provide each benefit[.]" (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10109 (emphasis added).)