What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration denied
Petition for Reconsideration filed and reviewed by WCAB panel after WCJ report
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 lien claimant failed to prove it served the exhibits on defendant prior to trial, violating due process and failing to meet its burden of proof under Labor Code section 4621(a).
From the decision · page 1We agree with petitioner that the rule applicable at the time of the August 15, 2018 lien conference was former WCAB rule 10770.1 and that new WCAB Rules 10625 and 10875 did not become effective until January 1, 2021. Nevertheless, at the time of the 2018 trial, lien claimant had a duty to serve defendant with its exhibits before trial. (See former Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10608.) Former WCAB Rule 10622 provided that "The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board may decline to receive in evidence, either at or subsequent to a hearing, any report offered under the provisions of Labor Code § 5703 by a party who has failed to comply with the provisions of Rules 10600, 10608, 10615, 10616 or 10618." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, former § 10622, now § 10670 (eff. Jan. 1, 2020).) These rules were intended to assure due process and give an opposing party an opportunity to inspect the documents and offer other evidence in explanation or rebuttal. (Katzin vs. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 703 [57 Cal. Comp. Cases 230, 236]; see also Hirschi v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1995) 60 Cal. Comp. Cases 773, 776 (writ den.) Moreover, a lien claimant has the burden to prove all of the elements necessary to the establishment of its lien by a preponderance of the evidence. (Torres v. AJC Sandblasting (2012)