Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
County of Sacramento v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Weatherall) (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1114, 1121
Stipulations binding absent good cause to withdraw
Defendant bound by stipulation that presumption applies
From the decision · page 5Code, § 3210.10 applies.” (MOH/SOE page 2 lines 12-13.) Stipulations are binding on the parties unless, on a showing of good cause, the parties are given permission to withdraw from their agreements. ( County of Sacramento v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd.
Reeves v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 22, 30
Heart trouble presumption affects burden of proof; defendant must prove employment had no causal relationship at all
General statements or other causes insufficient; must affirmatively prove no industrial contribution
From the decision · page 5However, once a prima facie case of heart trouble is established, the burden shifts to defendant to rebut the presumption of industrial causation. The heart trouble presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of proof and is rebuttable. ( Reeves v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., 61 Cal. 4th 291
Industrial injury need only be a contributing cause to disability
Any industrial contribution defeats rebuttal of presumption
From the decision · page 7there be no causal link to the employment. “In the workers’ compensation system, the industrial injury need only be a contributing cause to the disability.” ( South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., 61 Cal. 4th 291.) Therefore, based on the evidence presented, as Dr.