What the panel ordered
The Board grants reconsideration, rescinds the Order Dismissing Case, and returns the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the decision.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of the Order Dismissing Case issued by the WCJ on December 8, 2020, which dismissed the case without prejudice due to no good cause or objection filed to the Notice of Intention to Dismiss Case.
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 Board found the record insufficient to evaluate the Petition for Reconsideration or the WCJ's Order due to lack of admitted evidence, issues submitted for decision, and stipulations or admissions of the parties, thus granting reconsideration and returning the matter for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 3DISCUSSION A WCJ is required to "make and file findings upon all facts involved in the controversy and an award, order, or decision stating the determination as to the rights of the parties. Together with the findings, decision, order or award there shall be served upon all the parties to the proceedings a summary of the evidence received and relied upon and the reasons or grounds upon which the determination was made." (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Blackledge v. Bank of America, ACE American Insurance Company (2010) 75 Cal.Comp.Cases 613, 621-22 [2010 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 74] (Appeals Board en banc).) As required by section 5313 and explained in Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 475 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4947] (Appeals Board en banc), "the WCJ is charged with the responsibility of referring to the evidence in the opinion on decision, and of clearly designating the evidence that forms the basis of the decision." The WCJ's opinion on decision "enables the parties, and the Board if reconsideration is sought, to ascertain the basis for the decision, and makes the right of seeking reconsideration more meaningful." (Citation omitted.) (Id. at p. 476.) The WCJ's decision "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton, supra, at p.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
No record of admitted evidence, issues submitted for decision, or stipulations or admissions of the parties in the WCJ's decision.
Favours Applicant prevailed
Without a record, the Board was unable to evaluate the Petition for Reconsideration or the Order Dismissing Case, leading to granting reconsideration and returning the matter for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 3DISCUSSION A WCJ is required to "make and file findings upon all facts involved in the controversy and an award, order, or decision stating the determination as to the rights of the parties. Together with the findings, decision, order or award there shall be served upon all the parties to the proceedings a summary of the evidence received and relied upon and the reasons or grounds upon which the determination was made." (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Blackledge v. Bank of America, ACE American Insurance Company (2010) 75 Cal.Comp.Cases 613, 621-22 [2010 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 74] (Appeals Board en banc).) As required by section 5313 and explained in Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 475 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4947] (Appeals Board en banc), "the WCJ is charged with the responsibility of referring to the evidence in the opinion on decision, and of clearly designating the evidence that forms the basis of the decision." The WCJ's opinion on decision "enables the parties, and the Board if reconsideration is sought, to ascertain the basis for the decision, and makes the right of seeking reconsideration more meaningful." (Citation omitted.) (Id. at p. 476.) The WCJ's decision "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton, supra, at p.
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
From the decision · page 2On or about October 28, 2019, Defendant filed a Petition to Compel Applicant's attendance at a medical evaluation with a Panel QME, Dr. Choi. An Order Compelling Applicant's attendance at the medical evaluation was issued by Judge Nguyen on 10/31/2019.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Lab. Code, § 5313
WCJ must make and file findings upon all facts involved and serve a summary of evidence and reasons for determination (Lab. Code, § 5313).
The Board found the WCJ's decision lacked a record of admitted evidence and issues submitted for decision, requiring reconsideration.
From the decision · page 3DISCUSSION A WCJ is required to "make and file findings upon all facts involved in the controversy and an award, order, or decision stating the determination as to the rights of the parties. Together with the findings, decision, order or award there shall be served upon all the parties to the proceedings a summary of the evidence received and relied upon and the reasons or grounds upon which the determination was made." (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Blackledge v. Bank of America, ACE American Insurance Company (2010) 75 Cal.Comp.Cases 613, 621-22 [2010 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 74] (Appeals Board en banc).) As required by section 5313 and explained in Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 475 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4947] (Appeals Board en banc), "the WCJ is charged with the responsibility of referring to the evidence in the opinion on decision, and of clearly designating the evidence that forms the basis of the decision." The WCJ's opinion on decision "enables the parties, and the Board if reconsideration is sought, to ascertain the basis for the decision, and makes the right of seeking reconsideration more meaningful." (Citation omitted.) (Id. at p. 476.) The WCJ's decision "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton, supra, at p.
Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473
The Board found the record insufficient to evaluate the Petition or Order due to lack of these elements.
From the decision · page 3DISCUSSION A WCJ is required to "make and file findings upon all facts involved in the controversy and an award, order, or decision stating the determination as to the rights of the parties. Together with the findings, decision, order or award there shall be served upon all the parties to the proceedings a summary of the evidence received and relied upon and the reasons or grounds upon which the determination was made." (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Blackledge v. Bank of America, ACE American Insurance Company (2010) 75 Cal.Comp.Cases 613, 621-22 [2010 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 74] (Appeals Board en banc).) As required by section 5313 and explained in Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 475 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4947] (Appeals Board en banc), "the WCJ is charged with the responsibility of referring to the evidence in the opinion on decision, and of clearly designating the evidence that forms the basis of the decision." The WCJ's opinion on decision "enables the parties, and the Board if reconsideration is sought, to ascertain the basis for the decision, and makes the right of seeking reconsideration more meaningful." (Citation omitted.) (Id. at p. 476.) The WCJ's decision "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton, supra, at p.
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
No record of admitted evidence, issues submitted for decision, or stipulations or admissions of the parties in the WCJ's decision.
From the decision · page 3DISCUSSION A WCJ is required to "make and file findings upon all facts involved in the controversy and an award, order, or decision stating the determination as to the rights of the parties. Together with the findings, decision, order or award there shall be served upon all the parties to the proceedings a summary of the evidence received and relied upon and the reasons or grounds upon which the determination was made." (Lab. Code, § 5313; see also Blackledge v. Bank of America, ACE American Insurance Company (2010) 75 Cal.Comp.Cases 613, 621-22 [2010 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 74] (Appeals Board en banc).) As required by section 5313 and explained in Hamilton v. Lockheed Corporation (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 473, 475 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4947] (Appeals Board en banc), "the WCJ is charged with the responsibility of referring to the evidence in the opinion on decision, and of clearly designating the evidence that forms the basis of the decision." The WCJ's opinion on decision "enables the parties, and the Board if reconsideration is sought, to ascertain the basis for the decision, and makes the right of seeking reconsideration more meaningful." (Citation omitted.) (Id. at p. 476.) The WCJ's decision "must be based on admitted evidence in the record." (Hamilton, supra, at p.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.