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. ADJ8041070
Regular
Aug 20, 2014

JUANA MONROY vs. GATE GOURMET INC., TRAVELERS, XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied Travelers' Petition for Removal, which sought to reverse an order taking the case off calendar. The Board found that placing the matter off calendar would not cause substantial prejudice to Travelers. However, due to a genuine issue regarding injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE), the Board ordered bifurcation of that issue. The case will be reset for a priority conference, and if the AOE/COE issue is not resolved, it will proceed to trial on that specific matter.

Petition for RemovalOff Calendar OrderAOE-COEBifurcationAgreed Medical EvaluatorWCJ Report and RecommendationSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmPriority Conference CalendarPretrial Conference Statement
References
0
Case No. ADJ15799667
Regular
Mar 08, 2023

RICARDA DURAN SONIA TINEO TOLEDO vs. PRIORITY WORKFORCE, INC. dba MVP PAYROLL FINANCING LLC, PRIORITY BUSINESS SERVICES INC., UNITED WISCONSIN INSURANCE COMPANY administered by NEXT LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS

This case involves an applicant injured by a car while waiting for a ride home on her employer's premises after work. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration and found the injury compensable, holding that it arose out of and occurred in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The Board clarified that the applicant's presence on employer premises while waiting for transportation home was within the scope of employment, not a material deviation. The WCAB rescinded the prior order and substituted a new one finding AOE/COE injury to the applicant's head, deferring other issues.

AOE/COECourse and Scope of EmploymentGoing and Coming RulePremises RulePersonal ConvenienceSubstantial DeviationMedical OpinionsPermanent Disability RatingQMEAMA Guides
References
27
Case No. ADJ8092715
Regular
Apr 25, 2012

MARIO PEREZ-OSORIO vs. INTERLIFT, INC., COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for removal filed by Interlift, Inc. and Compwest Insurance Company. The defendants sought to have a priority hearing to address their statute of limitations defense and issues regarding the applicant's change of treating physicians. The Board agreed with the WCJ's recommendation to deny the petition, citing that a second injury with the same employer could impact apportionment and consolidate proceedings. They found that the defendant did not establish AOE/COE as a disputed issue to warrant a priority conference.

Petition for removalStatute of limitationsChange of treating physiciansLabor Code section 5405Labor Code section 4061Labor Code section 4062Labor Code section 5502Priority conferenceAOE/COEApportionment
References
0
Case No. ADJ7104046
Regular
May 17, 2011

TOMMIE WRIGHT vs. SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CORVEL CORPORATION, INC.

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant petitioned for removal, arguing the trial should not proceed due to issues with the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) review and deposition scheduling, as well as the applicant's failure to raise the injury AOE/COE in her declaration of readiness. The Appeals Board granted the petition, finding the applicant's omission of AOE/COE from her DOR problematic. Consequently, the Board redesignated the scheduled trial as a mandatory settlement conference to allow for further resolution, especially after the AME provided a supplemental report.

Petition for RemovalAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Declaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR)Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Injury Arising Out of and Occurring in the Course of Employment (AOE/COE)Supplemental ReportDepositionPretrial Conference StatementWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)
References
0
Case No. ADJ398757 (LBO 0393631)
Regular
Dec 24, 2010

GARY E. MORGAN vs. REYNOLDS BUICK, GMC & PONTIAC, ICW GROUP

The applicant sought removal, arguing that proceeding to trial on injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) without a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) opinion would be prejudicial. The defendants asserted factual defenses and their due process rights. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding that the applicant carries the burden of proof for AOE/COE. Therefore, the Board amended the trial order to exclude AOE/COE, allowing only the issue of travel expenses for a QME evaluation to be tried.

Petition for RemovalAOE/COEQualified Medical EvaluatorPQMECompensabilityTravel ExpensesLabor Code Section 4060Burden of ProofIndustrial InjuryMedical-Legal Evaluation
References
0
Case No. ADJ6875445
Regular
Aug 02, 2010

JOSE RIVAS vs. NNC MANAGEMENT, LLC/ADP TOTAL SOURCE, SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES

Defendant NNC Management, LLC/ADP Total Source sought removal of a WCJ's order to proceed to trial on both AOE/COE and temporary disability. The applicant claimed an injury in January 2009, and the employer denied it based on a post-termination defense. The defendant argues they were denied due process by being forced to litigate temporary disability without prior notice, as the initial proceedings focused solely on AOE/COE. The Appeals Board granted the petition for removal, amending the order to limit the August 4, 2010 trial to the AOE/COE issue only.

Petition for RemovalPost-termination defenseAOE/COETemporary DisabilityDue ProcessDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedPriority ConferenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscoverySubstitution of Attorneys
References
0
Case No. ADJ6751788
Regular
Aug 16, 2010

MOISES ROBLES GARCIA vs. ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a finding of industrial injury for applicant Moises Robles Garcia. Defendant Able Building Maintenance argued the applicant failed to prove injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) and raised affirmative defenses of intoxication and material deviation. The Board rescinded the original decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings, specifically to determine AOE/COE and consider the applicant's credibility and deposition transcripts. The WCJ must now make a determination on AOE/COE and potentially other defenses.

AOE/COEintoxication defensematerial deviationexcluded evidencedeposition transcriptswitness demeanorcredibilitypreponderance of the evidencecausal connectionrational incident of work
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Barnett v. Jamesway Corp. (In Re Jamesway Corp.)

This memorandum decision addresses a dispute concerning the administrative priority of attorneys' fees awarded under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act) to former employees of Jamesway Corp., as well as the scope of a prior summary judgment decision. The court determined that post-petition attorneys' fees, stemming from the debtor's continued litigation and loss, are entitled to administrative expense priority under the Bankruptcy Code. This decision applies to Union employees who accepted offers of judgment, deemed "Accepting Plaintiffs," as their offers were executory accords breached by Jamesway. However, the decision explicitly excludes "Grievance Claimants," as their terminations occurred before the WARN Act triggering event. The ruling emphasizes the public policy behind fee-shifting statutes to encourage legal representation for workers and ensure compliance.

WARN ActAdministrative PriorityAttorneys' FeesBankruptcy CodeExecutory AccordOffer of JudgmentWage ClaimsEmployee RightsStatutory InterpretationPost-petition Claims
References
11
Case No. ADJ10810340
Regular
Jan 04, 2018

DUSTIN RAMIREZ vs. VIASYSTEMS/TTM TECHNOLOGIES, TRAVELERS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration by the defendant, Viasystems/TTM Technologies, challenging a Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) findings. The WCJ's decision addressed statute of limitations, lack of prejudice, and date of injury, but not the ultimate issue of whether the applicant's injury arose out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The Appeals Board denied the petition because it was filed from an interlocutory order, not a final decision on AOE/COE. While the Board agreed that the WCJ's findings on the statute of limitations, notice, and date of injury were appealable, it ultimately denied reconsideration based on the WCJ's report, which found that the record required further development on the crucial AOE/COE issue.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDenying PetitionWCJ ReportFinal OrderSubstantive RightsThreshold IssueStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5405Date of Injury
References
8
Case No. ADJ12294911
Regular
Apr 14, 2025

KHADIJAH BROWN vs. REGINALD AJAKWE, MD, RAYMOND TATEVOSSIAN, MD, MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

Applicant Khadijah Brown sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that she did not sustain a psychiatric injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) and that a good faith personnel action defense was established. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the WCJ erroneously concluded applicant did not sustain injury to her psyche AOE/COE and failed to recognize objective evidence of harassment. The Board rescinded the original findings and substituted new findings, determining that applicant did sustain injury to her psyche AOE/COE and that this injury resulted from actual events of employment. The issue of the defendant's good faith personnel action defense was deferred for further proceedings.

AOE/COEpsychiatric injuryLabor Code Section 3208.3(b)(1)actual events of employmentharassmentgood faith personnel actionVerga v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.racial epithetsuspensiontermination
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 1,308 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