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. ADJ1688300 (OAK 0321767)
Regular
Jul 27, 2015

DEBBIE PARR (Dec'd) vs. LA XPRESS ASSEMBLY AND DISTRIBUTION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns whether a deceased applicant's petitions for sanctions and attorney's fees under Labor Code section 5813 survive their death. The defendant argued these claims were barred by the statute of limitations (section 5405), which limits the time for collecting benefits. However, the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, finding that sanctions under section 5813 are not "benefits" and therefore not subject to section 5405. Accordingly, the applicant's petitions for sanctions and attorney's fees do survive their death.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWCJLabor Code section 5814PenaltiesLabor Code section 5813SanctionsAttorney's Fees
References
5
Case No. ADJ587312 (LAO 0832831)
Regular
Dec 12, 2017

RAMIRO ZAPATA JIMENEZ vs. LUIS ARAGON, MARCOS BOLANOS, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Court of Appeal overturned the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's decision to affirm the joinder of defendant Marco Bolanos. The Court found Bolanos was a statutory employer but that his joinder was barred by the statute of limitations (Labor Code § 5405), with no grounds for tolling. Consequently, the Board amended its prior award to dismiss Bolanos as a defendant while affirming the original findings and award against Luis Aragon.

RemittiturStatute of LimitationsLabor Code section 5405Conclusive Statutory EmployerLabor Code section 2750.5Cedillo v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Reynolds v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.TollingUninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund
References
3
Case No. SAC 0332586
Regular
Jan 03, 2008

DAVID A. BELL vs. AGRAQUEST, INC., GOLDEN EAGLE INSURANCE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's findings. The WCJ determined that the applicant did not sustain an industrial injury to his sinus and immune system, and that his claim was barred by the statute of limitations due to late filing after termination. The Board found the medical evidence did not support industrial causation and that the applicant's claim was untimely under Labor Code sections 5405, 5409, and 3600(a)(10).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Awardindustrial injurycumulative traumasinushumoral immune systemstatute of limitationsLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)presumption of compensability
References
28
Case No. ADJ7689119
Regular
Mar 26, 2014

Anthony Pearsall vs. CITY OF VALLEJO, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the finding that his prostate cancer claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The Board agreed that the applicant knew about his condition and its potential work-relatedness as early as 2005, evidenced by his own testimony and that of his former attorney. This knowledge, coupled with the absence of a timely claim filing, established the date of injury in 2005, thus barring the claim under Labor Code section 5405.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of VallejoYork Insurance Services GroupPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5412compensable disabilityWhole Person Impairmentstatute of limitationscumulative injuryprostate cancer
References
1
Case No. ADJ312006 (LAO 0748305) ADJ824176 (PAS 0042661)
Regular
Aug 06, 2008

ANNA CLIFTON vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the WCJ's decision, finding that the applicant's claim for vocational rehabilitation services was barred by the statute of limitations. The applicant's initial request for dispute resolution was filed more than five years after the Stipulations and Award, exceeding the one-year limit under former Labor Code section 5405.5, which governs such claims. The Board concluded that affirming the WCJ's decision would unfairly reward the applicant's prolonged inaction.

Vocational RehabilitationStatute of LimitationsQualified Injured WorkerNotice of Potential EligibilityRehabilitation UnitStipulations and AwardDate of InjuryFindings and OrderReconsiderationExpedited Hearing
References
3
Case No. ADJ6925626
Regular
Jun 21, 2010

Nicholas Barragan vs. DPR Construction, National Union Fire Insurance

The applicant claimed an industrial injury on October 31, 2006, but the employer denied liability on January 4, 2007. Despite this denial, the applicant did not file an Application for Adjudication of Claim until September 10, 2009. The Board found the petition for reconsideration timely as it was filed within fifteen days of the defendant receiving the Findings and Award. Ultimately, the claim was dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations under Labor Code section 5405 because no benefits were provided after the denial and the application was filed more than one year after the denial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5405Denial of LiabilityApplication for Adjudication of ClaimTimelinessFindings and AwardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial Injury
References
2
Case No. ADJ8929238
Regular
Aug 15, 2019

MANUEL CABRERA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order denying their motion to dismiss an applicant's workers' compensation claim. The defendant argued the claim was time-barred under Labor Code Section 5405(a). However, the petition was denied because it failed to establish the necessary statutory grounds and failed to address factual issues like the applicant's knowledge of their rights. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied the petition, noting that reconsideration was unwarranted as the statute of limitations issue would be adjudicated at a properly scheduled hearing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDenialMotion to DismissLabor Code Section 5405Statute of LimitationsApplication for Adjudication of ClaimDeclaration of ReadinessReynolds noticeTolling the statute
References
0
Case No. ADJ4558222 (SJO 0245951)
Regular
Nov 12, 2006

MARK STEPHENS vs. SUN MICROSYSTEMS, permissibly self-insured, administered by MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior award, finding that the applicant's claim for further medical treatment was barred by the one-year statute of limitations under Labor Code section 5405. Despite the applicant's argument regarding inadequate notice based on the *Carls* decision, the Board concluded that the defendant provided all legally required notices following the industrial hernia injury. Therefore, the applicant's application, filed more than one year after the date of injury, expiration of payments, and last furnished medical benefits, was dismissed.

Labor Code section 5405statute of limitationsreconsiderationFindings and AwardApplication for Adjudication of Claimtollingactual knowledgeadequate noticelegally required noticesself-insured
References
5
Case No. ADJ9758295
Regular
Dec 10, 2018

JOHN BAILEY vs. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 3

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a finding that the applicant's claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The Board affirmed that the employer's voluntary provision of medical treatment and indemnity benefits tolled the one-year statute of limitations under Labor Code § 5405 to the five-year period under § 5410. The defendant's notice disputing permanent disability benefits did not clearly deny all liability for the claim, thus failing to restart the one-year limitations period. The issue of new and further disability was premature and not addressed by the Board in this decision.

Statute of LimitationsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderLabor Code § 5405Labor Code § 5410TollingNew and Further DisabilityWaiverEstoppelIndustrial Disability Leave (IDL)
References
13
Case No. ADJ9904638, ADJ7352002
Regular
Jul 25, 2017

Carmen Caez vs. California Department of Social Services (IHSS), administered by YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the prior decision to defer the statute of limitations issue for the applicant's low back and other injuries sustained on November 1, 2008. The Board found the initial determination barring benefits lacked substantial evidence, particularly regarding the timeliness of the claim under Labor Code section 5405. Further development of the record is required to address potential tolling of the statute of limitations due to the employer's failure to provide proper workers' compensation notification. The case is returned for further proceedings to resolve these issues.

ADJ9904638ADJ7352002IHSS caregiverLabor Code sections 35503551statute of limitations tolledclaim formHoneywell v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.denial letterApplication for Adjudication
References
20
Showing 1-10 of 16 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