California WCABPanel decision

ADJ2403735 · June 11, 2026

The Petition for Reconsideration of the Joint Findings of Fact issued on April 8, 2026 is granted. The Joint Findings of Fact are affirmed except amended to find defendant precluded from asserting entitlement to permanent disability credit advances and deferring issues of sanctions and penalties. The matter is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Issues decided: 3
Medical opinions weighed: 0
Authorities named: 3
District office: Long Beach

What the panel ordered

Defendant sought reconsideration of the Joint Findings of Fact issued on April 8, 2026, which denied defendant's entitlement to permanent disability credits and found certain issues moot. The WCAB granted reconsideration, affirmed the Joint Findings of Fact with amendments, and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings.

Read the official decision →

This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold February 27, 2025.

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.

Statute of limitationsMoot

The issue of whether Labor Code section 5814 bars revision of the Award more than five years after the date of injury is moot as previously adjudicated and not subject to further revision in this case.

Permanent disability rating

Private workspace

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

Paste the dispute. The extractor builds the factors, the search finds the decisions the same facts won, and the matter stays saved. Free account.

Start a matter Search without an account →

The rules the panel named

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

Labor Code section 5813

Section 5813 authorizes sanctions for bad-faith actions or tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.

The WCAB deferred the issue of sanctions against defendant for further proceedings.

From the decision · page 14*** 3. The issues of whether section 5813 sanctions, section 5814 penalties, and section 5814.5 attorney's fees should be imposed against defendant are deferred.

Labor Code section 4909; City and County of San Francisco v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (Quinn) (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1001; Herrera v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1969) 71 Cal.2d 254; Maples v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 827

The Appeals Board has discretion to grant or deny credit for overpayments under Labor Code section 4909, applying equitable principles.

The Appeals Board applied equitable principles to deny defendant's credit claims as they were not included in the stipulated awards and would prejudice the applicant.

From the decision · page 3Because Labor Code section 4909 uses the term "may," which is not mandatory language, the Appeals Board has the discretion whether to grant or deny credit for overpayments thereunder. (Lab. Code, § 15; City and County of San Francisco v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (Quinn) (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1001, 1016 [35 Cal.Comp.Cases 390]; Herrera v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1969) 71 Cal.2d 254, 258 [34 Cal.Comp.Cases 382].)

Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10555

Petition for credit must include description of payments, benefits, and amount claimed under Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10555.

The defendant failed to meet the requirements for petitioning credit as the advances were not included in the stipulated award.

From the decision · page 3(a) When a dispute arises as to a credit for any payments or overpayments of benefits pursuant to Labor Code section 4909, any petition for credit shall include: (1) A description of the payments made by the employer; (2) A description of the benefits against which the employer seeks a credit; and (3) The amount of the claimed credit. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10555.)

ADJ2403735 · June 11, 2026

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

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

The facts that decided it

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page