What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration denied.
Petition for Reconsideration filed November 17, 2025, reviewed and denied by the Appeals Board on January 30, 2026, adopting the WCJ's report and recommendation.
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 Appeals Board agreed with the WCJ that the 104 compensable week cap includes both temporary total and temporary partial disability weeks, based on the plain language of Labor Code section 4656(c)(2) and supporting case law, and found no further temporary disability indemnity owing as the cap was reached.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Defendant has paid a total of 104 compensable weeks of temporary disability indemnity, including both temporary partial and temporary total disability.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This fact establishes that the 104-week cap under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2) has been reached, barring further temporary disability payments.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code
Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)
The 104 compensable week cap on temporary disability indemnity includes both temporary total and temporary partial disability weeks.
From the decision · page 5Temporary disability may be either total or partial. (Labor Code § 4653 and 4654.) Limits on temporary disability indemnity for the date of injury at issue are laid out in Labor Code section 4656(c)(2). For purposes of this discussion, it is worthwhile to look at the bulk of Labor Code section 4656, which states in relevant part:
CA-WCAB panel decision
Supports that the 104-week cap applies to both temporary total and temporary partial disability indemnity payments.
CA-WCAB panel decision
Temporary disability indemnity applies to all types of temporary disability indemnity paid by a defendant.
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.