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. ADJ18376723
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

Miguel Mejinez vs. Substance Abuse Treatment Facility, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Removal regarding an order that rescinded a prior directive for the applicant to disclose medical history under Labor Code section 4663(d). The defendant argued that section 4663(d) compels disclosure upon request and that they suffered prejudice from the applicant's refusal. However, the Board, concurring with the WCJ's recommendation, found that while section 4663 broadened the scope of discovery, it did not expand the methods of compelled discovery, which are limited to oral testimony and records under Labor Code section 5708. Consequently, the defendant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm necessary for removal, concluding that written interrogatories are not an appropriate method for compelled discovery in workers' compensation cases.

Petition for RemovalOrder Rescinding OrderMedical History DisclosureLabor Code Section 4663(d)Previous Permanent DisabilitiesPhysical ImpairmentsSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsideration Adequate RemedyWritten Interrogatories
References
12
Case No. GRO 0028123, GRO 0028394
Significant
Feb 27, 2006

Eric Pasquotto, Applicant vs. Hayward Lumber, Connecticut Indemnity Insurance Company, and Athens Administrators (Adjusting Agent)

This case holds that an order approving a compromise and release agreement is not a 'prior award of permanent disability' under Labor Code section 4664(b), but evidence from the prior injury may still be relevant for apportionment under section 4663. It also affirms that medical rehabilitation from a prior disability remains a viable concept under section 4663.

SB 899ApportionmentCompromise and ReleasePrior AwardPermanent DisabilityMedical RehabilitationOther FactorsLabor Code Sections 4663 and 4664En Banc DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
57
Case No. ADJ1 0277951
Regular
Jul 17, 2017

DANNY HILL vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, legally uninsured and adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The defendant, Department of Transportation, sought to compel the applicant, Danny Hill, to disclose all prior permanent disabilities and physical impairments under Labor Code section 4663(d). The WCJ initially denied the defendant's petition, finding no good cause. The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinded the WCJ's denial, and returned the matter for further proceedings. The Board found the WCJ's denial unsupported, as Labor Code section 4663(d) unequivocally requires such disclosure upon request.

Petition for RemovalPetition to Compel DisclosureLabor Code section 4663(d)permanent disabilitiesphysical impairmentsWCJ denialAppeals Boardtrial levelmedical treatmentapplicant disclosure
References
2
Case No. SAC 0316687
Regular
May 20, 2008

STEVE OLSON vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address whether Labor Code section 4663(e), effective January 1, 2007, applies retroactively to a 2002 injury regarding apportionment of permanent disability for heart trouble. The Board rescinded its prior decision and the trial judge's decision, returning the case to the trial level to await a Court of Appeal ruling on this identical issue in the *Alexander* case. The outcome will depend on whether the court finds section 4663(e) retroactively applicable to pre-2007 injuries.

Labor Code section 4663section 4663(e)heart trouble presumptionapportionmentcumulative industrial injurycorrectional lieutenantpermanent disabilityreconsiderationrescindedretroactive application
References
1
Case No. ADJ2425610 (STK 0180003), ADJ3704258 (STK 0181637), ADJ6883666
Regular
Aug 27, 2012

STATE ADAMS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA YOUTH AUTHORITY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed prior findings awarding applicant cumulative industrial injuries to his circulatory and respiratory systems, and subsequent psychiatric injury. Applicant sought to reopen a stipulation for a 5% non-industrial apportionment based on a claimed change in law or mutual mistake of fact regarding Labor Code section 4663(e). The Board found no good cause to reopen, as section 4663(e) was declaratory of existing law and the defendant did not share applicant's asserted mistake. Therefore, the previous awards and stipulations, including the apportionment, remain valid.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental Findings and AwardCorrectional Youth CounselorCumulative Industrial InjuryCirculatory SystemRespiratory SystemPsychiatric InjuryPetition to ReopenNew and Further Disability
References
3
Case No. ADJ3416937 (SRO 0141443) ADJ4476347 (SRO 0118020)
Regular
Apr 25, 2011

TIMOTHY ROBINSON vs. COUNTY OF SONOMA, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case concerns apportionment of permanent disability for an injured correctional officer. The applicant sustained an admitted industrial injury to his neck, resulting in a 12% permanent disability after initial apportionment. The WCJ calculated a total permanent disability of 43%, then apportioned 20% to non-industrial factors under Labor Code section 4663. Further apportionment occurred for a prior low back injury under Labor Code section 4664, using a converted rating from the old schedule to the new AMA Guides. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding no prohibition against applying both section 4663 and section 4664 apportionment, and deeming the prior injury properly converted and subtracted. A dissenting opinion argued that the older rating schedule's "overlap" concept is incompatible with the current AMA Guides method, and that the defendant failed to prove overlap for the prior injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCounty of SonomaTimothy RobinsonCorrectional OfficerIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code Section 4663Labor Code Section 4664
References
6
Case No. ADJ637242 [SFO 0410171] ADJ2482512 [SFO 0430921]
Regular
Sep 23, 2008

JULIE ANN KAUS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

Reconsideration granted; matter returned to trial level for adequate trial record and further proceedings to address apportionment under sections 4663 and 4664.

WCABJulie Ann KausCalifornia Highway PatrolState Compensation Insurance FundFindings Award and Orderreconsiderationapportionmentpermanent disabilityLabor Code sections 46634664
References
9
Case No. ADJ2522273
Regular
Sep 05, 2008

HORTENCIA JAMES vs. ADDUS HEALTHCARE, CNA CASUALTY OF CALIFORNIA

Reconsideration granted; WCJ's denial of permanent disability for psychiatric injury reversed due to lack of apportionment; case remanded for further proceedings under Labor Code section 4663(c).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityCumulative TraumaCervical SpineLow BackPsycheCompensable ConsequenceQualified Medical EvaluatorApportionment
References
1
Case No. ADJ8210063
Significant

Grace Nunes, Applicant vs. State of California, DEPT. OF MOTOR VEHICLES, Legally Uninsured; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Adjusting Agency, Defendants

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, affirming its prior en banc decision that vocational evidence cannot substitute for valid medical apportionment from a physician, as mandated by Labor Code section 4663.

Labor Code Section 4663Vocational ApportionmentMedical ApportionmentPermanent DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidencePetition for ReconsiderationEn Banc DecisionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApportionment Analysis
References
32
Case No. ADJ3490254
Regular
Dec 07, 2009

MICHAEL TILLMANNS vs. JAY AND DANA RODRIGUEZ, KEMPER AUTO & HOME INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the prior decision that reduced permanent disability and denied attorney fees for attending the QME deposition. The Board rejected the applicant's contention that there was no basis for apportionment citing the amended Labor Code section 4663.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLabor Code section 4663Senate Bill 899Qualified Medical ExaminerMedical OpinionCredibility Assessment
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 63 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