What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration dismissed as moot.
Defendant filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration contending that the WCJ's decision did not address the issue of third-party credit. The WCJ issued an Amended Findings, Orders and Award allowing the third-party credit. No party sought reconsideration of the amended decision. The Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed as moot.
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 WCJ issued an amended decision allowing third-party credit, rendering the defendant's petition for reconsideration moot.
From the decision · page 1The WCJ issued a Findings, Orders and Award on December 23, 2021. Defendant filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration contending that the WCJ's decision did not address the issue of third-party credit. On January 11, 2022, the WCJ issued an Amended Findings, Orders and Award allowing the third-party credit against defendant's liability for permanent disability pursuant to his authority under WCAB Rule 10961. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10961.) No party sought reconsideration of the January 11, 2022 amended decision.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The WCJ issued an Amended Findings, Orders and Award allowing third-party credit against defendant's liability for permanent disability.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This rendered the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration moot because no party sought reconsideration of the amended decision.
From the decision · page 1The WCJ issued a Findings, Orders and Award on December 23, 2021. Defendant filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration contending that the WCJ's decision did not address the issue of third-party credit. On January 11, 2022, the WCJ issued an Amended Findings, Orders and Award allowing the third-party credit against defendant's liability for permanent disability pursuant to his authority under WCAB Rule 10961. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10961.) No party sought reconsideration of the January 11, 2022 amended decision.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, A7 10961
WCAB Rule 10961 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, A7 10961)
The WCJ used this rule to allow third-party credit in the amended decision.
From the decision · page 1The WCJ issued a Findings, Orders and Award on December 23, 2021. Defendant filed a timely Petition for Reconsideration contending that the WCJ's decision did not address the issue of third-party credit. On January 11, 2022, the WCJ issued an Amended Findings, Orders and Award allowing the third-party credit against defendant's liability for permanent disability pursuant to his authority under WCAB Rule 10961. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10961.) No party sought reconsideration of the January 11, 2022 amended decision.
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.