The whole released corpus, not the closest twelve. Filter by issue and outcome, kind, year, office, Labor Code section, or holding. Each row is the ADJ number, the disposition with its page, and the official PDF. To search by a fact pattern, use /explore.
Released decisions
5,374
Matching these filters
10
Page
1 of 1
Released decisions10 of 5,374
Decision
Issues · outcome
Disposition
Open
ADJ9477566 →May 28, 2026 · Santa AnaPanel decision
Can I browse all released California WCAB panel decisions?+−
Yes. This list is the released corpus, filterable by issue and outcome, kind, year, district office, Labor Code section, or holding. Each row is the ADJ number, disposition, and official PDF — not a claimant name.
Should I search by facts instead?+−
If you have a dispute to paste, use /explore. This page is for scanning or filtering the whole set, not ranking by similarity.
Why is an older panel missing?+−
Most of the ordinary panel archive here starts in 2021. En banc files go further back. Coverage and the gaps are listed on /california/coverage. Filtered views are not separate indexable pages.
Published panel decisions, almost all since 2021: the litigated tail of a system that mostly settles. Issues and outcomes were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. A row is a decision, never a claimant. Not legal advice.
Defendant's Petition for Reconsideration is GRANTED. Final decision after reconsideration is DEFERRED pending further review of the merits and entire record.
Petitions for reconsideration granted; WCJ's decision of August 6, 2024 rescinded; case returned to trial level for further development and decision consistent with en banc decision in Vigil v. County of Kern (2024).
The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirmed the WCJ's findings except to defer the issue of psychiatric injury and entitlement to psychiatric medical treatment, and returned the matter to the trial level for further development of the record.
Reconsideration granted; December 13, 2023 F&O rescinded; new findings that Windy City Thunderbolts waived defense of lack of personal jurisdiction; further record development required for personal jurisdiction over Kansas City Royals; applicant's election under Labor Code section 5500.5 affirmed as inappropriate.