ADJ4271541 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

The Petitions for Disqualification filed by applicant on May 4, 2023 and May 23, 2023 are denied.

Applicant filed two Petitions for Disqualification of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 4, 2023 and May 23, 2023, which were considered and denied by the Appeals Board.

Read the official decision →

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.

Reconsideration / removalDefendant prevailed

The petitions did not set forth sufficient facts under penalty of perjury to establish grounds for disqualification under the cited laws and rules.

From the decision · page 1Applicant filed two Petitions for Disqualification of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), on May 4, 2023 and May 23, 2023. We have considered the allegations of the Petitions for Disqualification and the contents of the report of with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ's analysis of the merits of petitioner's arguments in the WCJ's report, we will deny both Petitions for Disqualification.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 10960

WCAB Rule 10960

Requires petitions for disqualification to be supported by detailed facts under penalty of perjury.

From the decision · page 1Under WCAB Rule 10960, proceedings to disqualify a WCJ "shall be initiated by the filing of a petition for disqualification supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury stating in detail facts establishing one or more of the grounds for disqualification...." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10960, italics added.) It has long been recognized that "[t]he allegations in a statement charging bias and prejudice of a judge must set forth specifically the facts on which the

California Labor Code

Labor Code section 5311

Provides grounds for disqualification of a WCJ.

From the decision · page 1Labor Code section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (Lab. Code, § 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has "formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action" (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated "[t]he existence of a state of mind... evincing enmity against or bias toward either party" (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)).

California Code of Civil Procedure

Code of Civil Procedure section 641

Specifies grounds for disqualification including bias or fixed opinion.

From the decision · page 1Labor Code section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (Lab. Code, § 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has "formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action" (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated "[t]he existence of a state of mind... evincing enmity against or bias toward either party" (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)).

ADJ4271541 · June 9, 2023

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

The rules the panel named

About this page