What the panel ordered
The Board vacated its December 1, 2022 Order granting reconsideration, dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature, and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) issued by the WCJ on August 25, 2022, which was initially granted by the Board on December 1, 2022, but later vacated and dismissed as premature by the Board on August 29, 2023, returning the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.
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 that the C&R did not sufficiently identify the body parts settled, and the WCJ did not hold a hearing or create a complete record, thus the Petition to set aside the OACR was premature and required further proceedings.
From the decision · page 4Additionally, we note that our cursory review of the C&R shows that it did not sufficiently identify the body parts that were settled. For example, it is improper to list "any and all per application and claim form" in the other body parts section. The C&R must identify each body part that is to be settled with specificity, and the items listed must be actual body parts in order to clearly demonstrate that both parties mutually agreed on settlement. Additionally, the broad language of Paragraph Nine cannot override the specific language of Paragraph One.