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. ADJ6798245 ADJ6864349
Regular
Jan 05, 2010

Jerry Weissberger vs. TRADER JOE'S

Trader Joe's petitioned for removal to litigate post-termination and statute of limitations issues before the completion of the AME/QME process. The Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that Trader Joe's failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board found that the defendant's petition lacked sufficient allegations regarding termination notice and that further medical evidence was warranted to determine injury dates and potential exceptions. Therefore, the defendant's petition for removal was denied.

Petition for RemovalOrder Taking Off CalendarMandatory Settlement ConferenceAME/QME processthreshold issuespost terminationstatute of limitationsdue processirreparable harmPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ7442025
Regular
May 16, 2012

LENNIE WIDEN vs. IN HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the applicant sustained a specific left shoulder injury in February 2009 based on her credible testimony and medical evidence. The Board affirmed the WCJ's credibility findings and also admonished defense counsel for failing to cite the record properly. The defendant's arguments regarding medical determinations, credibility, post-termination issues, and laches were rejected.

In Home Supportive ServicesState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.WCAB Rule 10842(b)home care providerleft shoulder injuryFebruary 2009credibility determination
References
Case No. ADJ8477952
Regular
Jan 15, 2013

ADAN CASTANEDA, JOAQUINA CASTANEDA vs. CITY OF ROSEMEAD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision awarding death benefits. The Board found that the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) adequately considered all evidence, and the defendant's accusations of partiality were unfounded. The Board affirmed the WCJ's reliance on specific physician reports and the applicant's widow's testimony, which established a causal link between the applicant's industrial injuries and his death. The Board also recommended sanctions against defense counsel for using unprofessional and intemperate language.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdan CastanedaJoaquina CastanedaCity of RosemeadState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8477952Order Denying Reconsiderationsubstantial evidenceWCJReport and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ9580231 (MF), ADJ9580348, ADJ10575850, ADJ10579286
Regular
Feb 23, 2023

PEDRO PUENTES SALAZAR vs. PREMIER LANDSCAPING, TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE, FARMERS INSURANCE

A lien claimant, Joyce Altman Interpreters, petitioned for reconsideration after a WCJ barred their recovery of services due to the statute of limitations on certain cases. The lien claimant argued the WCJ erred by excluding evidence and violating due process regarding the statute of limitations. The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and approved a stipulation between the lien claimant and defendants. This stipulation likely resolves the statute of limitations issue and allows for recovery.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantStatute of LimitationsLabor Code § 4903.5Labor Code § 5404ReconsiderationFindings and OrderWCJDue ProcessRecord Development
References
Case No. ADJ3609087 (LBO 0392035) ADJ1000696 (LBO 0332475)
Regular
Jul 20, 2017

Katherine Staudt vs. University of California Los Angeles, SEDGWICK CMS

This case involved the dismissal of the applicant's workers' compensation claims by the administrative law judge (WCJ) for failing to personally appear at a mandatory settlement conference. The applicant, represented by counsel who did attend, sought reconsideration, arguing that her attorney's presence satisfied the appearance requirement under Labor Code § 5700. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, finding that while the applicant did not personally appear, her attorney's presence constituted a valid appearance. The WCAB rescinded the dismissal order, emphasizing the legal preference for hearings on the merits over dismissals.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing CaseMandatory Settlement ConferenceApplicant's AppearanceAttorney AppearanceLabor Code Section 5700Section 5404.5Compulsory AppearanceNotice of Intent to Dismiss
References
Case No. ADJ10360343
Regular
May 01, 2017

SONIA DIAZ vs. BALBOA WATER GROUP, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY BY CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES

This case involves defendant's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision finding applicant sustained a cumulative trauma (CT) injury. The defendant argued the claim was barred by the statute of limitations due to the applicant's prior legal representation and medical reports indicating a cumulative injury. The WCAB denied the petition, affirming the finding that the defendant failed to prove the date of injury and thus could not establish the statute of limitations defense. Crucially, the WCAB emphasized the applicant's language barrier and the defendant's failure to provide required notices, which tolled the statute of limitations.

Cumulative traumaStatute of limitationsAOE/COEWCJPetition for ReconsiderationPrimary treating physicianQualified medical examinerSpanish-language interpreterDWC-1 claim formEquitable tolling
References
Case No. ADJ8531799
Regular
Aug 14, 2013

ELIZABETH JANIAK HOLCOMB vs. COUNTY OF YUBA

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the timeliness of an applicant's workers' compensation claim. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied reconsideration, finding that the applicant's testimony regarding non-receipt of a crucial denial letter rebutted the presumption of delivery. The ALJ also determined that, despite the denial letter's content, the defendant's continued interaction with the applicant and lack of clear notice of the statute of limitations made it inequitable to bar the claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted and incorporated the ALJ's report, denying the petition.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCOUNTY OF YUBAYORK RISK SERVICES GROUPINC.ADJ8531799Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Case ManagerPsyche
References
Case No. ADJ7185832
Regular
Jan 26, 2012

CLINT WEIBL vs. ST. LOUIS CARDINALS, AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a former professional baseball player's workers' compensation claim for cumulative injuries. The defendant argued the claim was barred by the statute of limitations, asserting the applicant knew his disability was employment-related over a year before filing. However, the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof. The Board determined the applicant's knowledge of industrial causation was not established to bar the claim within the statutory period.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryLumbar SpineRight ShoulderRight FootStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Sections 54045405
References
Case No. ADJ8270940
Regular
Oct 24, 2016

UBALDO GARZA vs. CITY OF FRESNO, Permissibly Self-Insured C/O RISICO Claims Management

This case concerns applicant Ubaldo Garza's claim for industrial psychiatric injury following a 2005 shooting incident. The defendant, City of Fresno, argued the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. However, the Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the claim was timely filed because applicant received compensable psychiatric treatment in July 2011. This treatment was deemed related to the 2005 injury, as per the Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion, and occurred within one year of filing the application. Therefore, the City's statute of limitations defense failed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUbaldo GarzaCity of Fresnopolice officerindustrial injuryright armlegspsychiatric injurycompensable consequencestatute of limitations
References
Case No. ADJ4298797
Regular
Aug 24, 2009

REYNALDA ANGEL vs. HAPPY DAY DOMESTIC AGENCY, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involved the Applicant's petition for reconsideration after her workers' compensation claim was dismissed for inactivity. The dismissal was based on procedures that did not align with the alleged injury date, which fell between January 1, 1990, and January 1, 1994. The Appeals Board found the dismissal order ineffective and rescinded it, returning the matter to the trial level for adherence to the correct statutory dismissal procedures.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of DismissalNotice of Intention to DismissExcusable NegligenceInactivityLabor Code Section 5404.5California Code of Regulations Section 10582Application for AdjudicationLack of ProsecutionRescinded
References
Showing 1-10 of 11 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