Home/Case Law/NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY
Regular DecisionRegular Panel Decision

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

Filed: Oct 24, 2025
Van Nuys
ADJ16913929

CompFox AI Summary

Applicant Nidya Gonzalez and defendant Sizzler USA Acquisition, Inc., insured by Preferred Employers Insurance Company, both sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings of Fact and Award (F&A) from February 27, 2025, which found applicant sustained a cumulative injury with 95% permanent disability. Defendant contended the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and post-termination defense, and that Dr. Rubanenko's reports lacked substantial medical evidence, while applicant contended a miscalculation in permanent disability. The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition, finding the claim was not barred and Dr. Rubanenko's reports constituted substantial medical evidence. The Board granted the applicant's petition, amending the F&A to set applicant's earnings at $1,272.03 per week, resulting in a temporary and permanent total disability rate of $848.20 per week, and increasing the permanent disability to 100% based on an age adjustment correction and the application of the Vigil decision regarding overlapping impairments.

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY is a workers' compensation case decided in Van Nuys. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Van Nuys.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

Applicant Nidya Gonzalez and defendant Sizzler USA Acquisition, Inc., insured by Preferred Employers Insurance Company, both sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings of Fact and Award (F&A) from February 27, 2025, which found applicant sustained a cumulative injury with 95% permanent disability. Defendant contended the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and post-termination defense, and that Dr. Rubanenko's reports lacked substantial medical evidence, while applicant contended a miscalculation in permanent disability. The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition, finding the claim was not barred and Dr. Rubanenko's reports constituted substantial medical evidence. The Board granted the applicant's petition, amending the F&A to set applicant's earnings at $1,272.03 per week, resulting in a temporary and permanent total disability rate of $848.20 per week, and increasing the permanent disability to 100% based on an age adjustment correction and the application of the Vigil decision regarding overlapping impairments.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY workers compensation case in Van Nuys. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY case law summary from Van Nuys. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY Case Analysis

NIDYA GONZALEZ vs. SIZZLER USA ACQUISITION, INC., PREFERED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY is a legal case related to workers' compensation in Van Nuys. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.