CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a civil engineer claiming industrial psychiatric injury due to workplace stressors. The administrative law judge initially found the applicant did not sustain industrial psychiatric injury, determining the employer's actions were lawful, non-discriminatory, and good-faith personnel actions. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the initial decision lacked a sufficient Rolda analysis. The Board remanded the case for further proceedings to fully address the employer's good-faith personnel action defense and its substantial contribution to the claimed injury.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a civil engineer claiming industrial psychiatric injury due to workplace stressors. The administrative law judge initially found the applicant did not sustain industrial psychiatric injury, determining the employer's actions were lawful, non-discriminatory, and good-faith personnel actions. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the initial decision lacked a sufficient Rolda analysis. The Board remanded the case for further proceedings to fully address the employer's good-faith personnel action defense and its substantial contribution to the claimed injury.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.