CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ7782081
Regular
Nov 06, 2013

IGNACIO PIMENTEL vs. CASA LA GOLONDRINA, PUBLIC SERVICE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CORVEL CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The defendant argued the applicant's testimony was not credible and alleged fraud based on new evidence from co-workers. However, the Board found the evidence, including co-worker testimony and the employer's report, supported the applicant's account. The Board also found the defendant's petition did not meet the requirements for newly discovered evidence or fraud under CCR § 10856.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ credibilityGarza v. Workmen's Comp. App. Bd.course of employmenttemporary disabilityfurther medical treatmentsubstantial evidenceapplicant's testimonynewly discovered evidence
References
Case No. ADJ3691698 (SFO 0463767)
Regular
May 22, 2009

FAITH LATIMER vs. CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER; permissibly self-insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an injury sustained by applicant Faith Latimer. The defendant sought to introduce new evidence of a subsequent injury and diagnostic testing, claiming it impacted applicant's credibility and the prior decision. However, the Board found the defendant failed to meet the requirements for newly discovered evidence under WCAB Rule 10856, as they did not demonstrate how the evidence could not have been discovered earlier or its effect on the prior findings. The Board concluded the new evidence would not alter the decision awarding temporary disability and medical treatment for the initial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationReopeningIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderLow BackNeckLeft ShoulderCompensable ConsequenceTotal Temporary Disability
References
Case No. ADJ3964372 (MON 0247784) ADJ4081926 (MON 0247785)
Regular
Dec 07, 2018

ROBERT BAKER vs. CITY OF COMPTON

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Robert Baker's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed *in pro per* without proof of service on all adverse parties, including his own attorney. The petition also failed to meet the requirements of Appeals Board Rule 10856 by not providing a specific offer of proof for newly discovered evidence or fraud. Consequently, the Board found the petition defective on multiple grounds.

Petition for Reconsiderationin pro perJoint Order Approving C&RWCJAppeals Board Rule 10856newly discovered evidenceoffer of proofcumulative evidenceproof of serviceadverse parties
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ859899 (LBO 0374978)
Regular
Oct 25, 2010

FERNANDO SOSA vs. RIGOBERTO URIARTE DBA RIGO'S PLASTERING; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Rigoberto Uriarte's petition for reconsideration. The defendant's petition was found to be impermissibly skeletal, lacking specific references to the record and legal authority as required by California Code of Regulations. The Board cited regulations outlining the necessary components of a petition for reconsideration, including stating material evidence and clearly setting forth contentions. As the defendant failed to meet these procedural requirements, their petition was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRigoberto UriarteRigo's PlasteringUninsured Employers FundPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryTemporary DisabilitySkeletal PetitionCalifornia Code of Regulations
References
Case No. ADJ433589 (VNO 0467795)
Regular
Dec 19, 2013

GLADYS GIRON vs. JUDITH LARSON, IDEAL FOODS, INC., UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Gladys Giron's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board admonished applicant's counsel for multiple procedural violations in the petition, including exceeding page limits with improper formatting and appending improperly admitted evidence. Furthermore, the petition's tone bordered on impugning the Workers' Compensation Judge's integrity, which is sanctionable. Finally, an unfiled Response was submitted by applicant's counsel.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportApplicant's CounselPage Limit ViolationFont Size ViolationLinespacing ViolationRule 10842(c)Rule 10856Catering Truck and Route AgreementSworn Statement
References
Case No. ADJ2649808 (STK 0209059)
Regular
May 16, 2017

CHRIS ARSENAULT vs. CARPET MASTER, MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding a finding of 100% permanent disability for an admitted back injury. The defendant argued the vocational expert's report was flawed and unsubstantiated, but the Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of credibility. The WCJ's decision correctly applied *Dahl* to find the applicant not amenable to vocational rehabilitation due to his functional limitations, pain, and depression. The Board also rejected the defendant's attempt to admit newly discovered evidence, as it did not meet the criteria for such admission.

Vocational evaluatorpermanent disabilityreconsiderationindustrial injuryvocational reportingmedical evidencesubjective evidencedepressionvocational rehabilitationchronic pain
References
Case No. SRO 0132223
Regular
Aug 22, 2008

TRACY SAYLOR vs. UKIAH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, KEENAN AND ASSOCIATES

The WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior decision, and returned the case to the WCJ for further proceedings due to doubts about applicant's credibility and defendant's due diligence.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ OpinionMedical HistoryDue DiligencePsyche ClaimNewly Discovered EvidenceEvidentiary HearingCredibilityPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical Treatment
References
Case No. VNO 0426480
Regular
Dec 14, 2007

IRMA SCOTT vs. BERGEN BRUNSWIG DRUG COMPANY, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow the defendant to introduce newly discovered surveillance footage of the applicant. The Board found the defendant demonstrated reasonable diligence in attempting to obtain this evidence, and the footage is relevant to the applicant's permanent disability. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings, including consideration of the new evidence and potential re-evaluation of the applicant's disability rating and attorney fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial cumulative traumaBilateral upper extremitiesNeckBackPermanent disability ratingReconsiderationSurveillance filmsNewly discovered evidenceDue diligence
References
Case No. ADJ7605039
Regular
May 25, 2012

LYNETTE KERMANINEJAD vs. GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration in the case of Kermaninejad v. Good Samaritan Hospital. The Board adopted the findings of the administrative law judge and incorporated them into their order. Defense counsel was admonished for attempting to introduce new evidence without meeting the required legal standard. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was denied.

WCABReconsideration deniedNew evidenceWCAB Rule 10856Administrative law judge reportDefense counsel admonishedSan Jose District OfficeGood Samaritan HospitalBroadspireLynette Kermaninejad
References
Showing 1-10 of 30 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational