Gaines Clarifies California Workers’ Comp Settlement Approval and Due Process

Read the source decision or official decision listing.

A signed workers’ compensation settlement is an important milestone, but in California it is not the final step. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board must approve the agreement after considering whether its terms are valid and adequate.

In Calvin Gaines et al. v. ABM Aviation, Inc. et al., 2026-EB-01, the WCAB addressed 24 cases in which the same workers’ compensation judge had suspended action on proposed settlements. Because the Board acted en banc, its legal holdings bind WCAB panels and workers’ compensation administrative law judges.

Approval Protects the Injured Worker and the Public

The Board explained that a compromise and release becomes enforceable only after WCAB approval. A judge must consider whether the agreement is valid and whether the settlement is adequate. That review helps protect the injured worker and the public interest; it is not a ministerial signature exercise.

If terms are inconsistent, incomplete, unlawful, or potentially inadequate, a judge may investigate. The judge may suspend action, request enough information to evaluate the agreement, and, if necessary, hold a hearing to develop an evidentiary record.

Substantive Review Still Requires Due Process

The WCAB nevertheless rescinded the orders before it. It concluded that the procedures used in these matters deprived the parties of adequate notice and an opportunity to respond. The Board also disqualified the judge from further participation after finding that comments reflected prejudgment and bias.

The lesson runs in both directions: proposed settlements receive meaningful scrutiny, but that scrutiny must occur through a fair process. A judge should identify concerns, allow the parties to present evidence and argument, and avoid deciding disputed issues without a proper record.

What a Settlement Record Should Address

A well-supported submission may need to explain the claimed body parts and dates of injury, medical evidence, temporary and permanent disability, future medical treatment, benefit payments, liens, credits, attorney fees, and any disputed terms. Inconsistent numbers or unexplained language can delay approval.

The adequacy inquiry is case-specific. The decision does not establish a minimum settlement value or guarantee approval merely because both sides signed.

Key Takeaways

• A California workers’ compensation settlement requires WCAB approval.
• The judge may investigate inconsistent or potentially inadequate terms.
• Parties must receive notice and a fair opportunity to respond.
• Accurate medical and benefit records can reduce avoidable approval delays.