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.
The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's October 13, 2025 Findings and Order, and substituted a new order finding the QME Panel #7799762 was valid and not vacated.
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.
Petition for removal granted; February 19, 2025 Findings of Fact and Orders rescinded; new Finding and Order that an additional panel in internal medicine is warranted substituted; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings.
The WCAB granted the Petition for Reconsideration, rescinded the April 9, 2024 Findings and Order, substituted new findings that applicant is entitled to a QME panel in internal medicine for case ADJ14300773, and returned the matter to the district office for further proceedings.
Petition for Reconsideration granted; August 24, 2022 Amended Findings of Fact and Order affirmed except amended to find QME panel no. 2839682 valid and rescinding order to obtain new QME panel.
Findings and Award affirmed, except amended to clarify apportionment of left knee permanent disability at 70%. Both petitions for reconsideration denied.
The Appeals Board granted defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, rescinded the October 5, 2021 Joint Findings, Award and Order, and substituted new findings and award reflecting the November 23, 2020 Findings of Fact except as to the issue of temporary disability credit, where the WCJ's October 5, 2021 findings were substituted. Defendant was not entitled to credit for temporary disability sums paid from February 20, 2014 to July 23, 2014. Permanent disability was found to be 25%, with indemnity and medical treatment awards granted.
Findings, Award, and Order affirmed except amended to find QME Dr. Wieseltier's reports not substantial evidence on apportionment; permanent disability issue deferred; applicant entitled to future medical care; issue of treatment outside MPN deferred; matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings
Petition for Reconsideration granted in part and Findings and Award amended to deny credit for overpayment of temporary disability from 12/8/2020 to 2/15/2021 and to allow credit from 2/16/2021 to 3/1/2021; otherwise Findings and Award affirmed
WCJ's decision affirmed; AD Rule 30(d)(3) invalidated; defendant entitled to request QME panel after denial of injury claim; case remanded for further proceedings.
The Appeals Board rescinded the May 6, 2004 WCJ decision and remanded the matter to the WCJ to allow the defendant a reasonable time to initiate the AME/QME procedure and for the WCJ to redetermine the applicant's entitlement to right shoulder surgery after completion of the AME/QME procedure.
WCJ's July 21, 2004 Findings and Award and Order rescinded; matter remanded to trial level for further proceedings and new decision consistent with en banc opinionp. 13
The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision except it rescinded the appointment of Dr. Angerman as a medical evaluator and returned the matter to the trial level for further development of the medical record from Drs. Sobol and Berman.
The Board affirmed the WCJ's decision that the applicant could select a new treating physician and was entitled to the recommended further medical treatment.