FLORES v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD (1995)

THE COURT:

The petition for writ of review, response and reply have been read and considered by Justices Benke, Nares, and Haller.

Review of the opinion and decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) is limited to whether it acted without or in excess of its powers, the decision was procured by fraud, was unreasonable or was not supported by substantial evidence. (Lab.Code, § 5952.) The findings and conclusions of the WCAB on questions of fact are conclusive and final and are not subject to review. (Lab.Code, § 5953.)

Here, the WCAB did not act unreasonably or in excess of its powers in rescinding the order and award of the workers' compensation judge. The WCAB correctly concluded the doctrine of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel applied to bar petitioner from litigating the nature and extent of his back injury after full and final adversary proceedings on the same issue against the same party under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. (See Bianchi v. City of San Diego (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 563, 566-567.)

Similarly, the WCAB was not unreasonable in concluding the findings of the workers' compensation judge were not supported by substantial evidence, given the showing the administrative law judge found petitioner not credible and the evidence petitioner provided inaccurate and conflicting medical histories to his treating and evaluating physicians in his state proceedings.

The petition is denied.

NARES, J.