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. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ6918399
Regular
Feb 27, 2013

MARIA SANCHEZ vs. AUTOZONE, INC./USF&G, Administered By GALLAGHER BASSETT/NUFIC Administered By GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration regarding the dismissal of its lien. Despite the lien claimant's assertion of lack of notice, the record indicates their representative appeared and signed in for the trial. The WCAB found the petition frivolous, citing the claimant's failure to object to a Notice of Intention to Dismiss and misrepresentation of facts. Consequently, the WCAB intends to impose sanctions up to $1,200.00 against the lien claimant and its representative for abuse of process.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder of Dismissal of LienLien ClaimantNotice of Intention to DismissDue ProcessHearingWCJBoard Rule 10562Labor Code section 5813Sanctions
References
Case No. ADJ10363674
Regular
Nov 17, 2016

RUBY BRADLEY vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN ASSISTANCE; Permissibly SelfInsured, Adjusted By COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO WORK COMP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Ruby Bradley's petition for removal, upholding an order compelling her to attend a medical examination with a panel qualified medical evaluator (PQME). Bradley claimed due process violations regarding notice and a replacement PQME panel, but the Board found she failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The WCJ's report, incorporated by the Board, noted Bradley's own admission contradicted her claim of premature scheduling and highlighted a prior agreement to proceed with the original PQME. The Board also admonished Bradley's counsel for misleadingly omitting material facts, potentially constituting an abuse of the system.

Petition for RemovalCompelling AttendanceMedical ExaminationPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorPQMEIndustrial InjuryNervous SystemPsychiatric InjuriesDue ProcessReplacement Panel
References
Case No. ADJ6463173
Regular
Feb 13, 2015

Salvador Orozco vs. Golden Wheel Corporation, Pacific Compensation Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal and rescinded an order from a WCJ that sanctioned a lien claimant and ordered personal appearances from its representatives. The WCAB found that the WCJ abused his discretion by issuing sanctions and appearance orders without affording the lien claimant proper due process and notice. Specifically, the lien claimant was not adequately notified that its compliance with Business & Professions Code section 22450 regarding photocopier licensing would be litigated and result in sanctions. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings consistent with due process, allowing for evidence and legal briefing on the licensing issue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalNotice of Intention to SanctionWCJMonetary SanctionsBusiness LicenseBusiness and Professions Code Section 22450Due Process
References
Case No. ADJ1774552 (OXN 0142840) ADJ3077412 (OXN 0142839)
Regular
Oct 28, 2008

ROGENE GIANGROSSI vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS - CHINO, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant's petition for removal was denied because the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found no abuse of discretion by the administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ correctly took the case off calendar when the applicant was absent for trial due to relocating out of state, as permitted by board rules. The board also found that the WCJ's order did not prejudice the applicant's right to future discovery or due process.

Petition for RemovalOff CalendarAbuse of DiscretionDue ProcessMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeferred RulingDevelopment of RecordSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ103216 (LAO 0867367) MF, ADJ7061769, ADJ7167560
Regular
Mar 25, 2013

ROSA PALAFOX vs. PELICAN PRODUCTS, INC., UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed defendant Pelican Products' petitions for reconsideration. These petitions challenged a judge's decision not to disqualify another judge and a trial held despite a pending disqualification issue. The Board found both petitions lacked merit and that defendant's attorney, Martin Reiner, had a history of filing frivolous motions and abusing process. Sanctions against Mr. Reiner were contemplated but deferred to avoid further delay in the case.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCJ DisqualificationLabor Code Section 5910SanctionsFrivolous PetitionAbuse of ProcessPeremptory ChallengesInformal Petition to DisqualifyNotice of Intention to SubmitMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ460672 (SFO 0499592) ADJ1224818 (SFO 0499593)
Regular
Feb 17, 2009

HAMID KHAZAELI vs. SPEDIA. COM and SYSMASTER CORPORATION, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because the order being challenged was procedural and not a final appealable order. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no evidence of significant prejudice or irreparable harm justifying this extraordinary remedy. The applicant's arguments regarding rescinded orders, discovery abuse, and due process were unaddressed as the procedural nature of the order precluded review. The Board cautioned the applicant against filing frivolous petitions, warning of potential sanctions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalInterlocutory OrderProcedural OrderFinal OrderLabor Code section 5900Substantive RightsDiscovery IssuesAbuse of Discovery
References
Case No. ADJ7172643; ADJ7172641
Regular
Apr 02, 2012

JUSTIN MILLER vs. PF CHANGS CHINA BISTRO, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves an applicant whose workers' compensation claims were dismissed by the WCJ for lack of activity and prosecution. The applicant sought reconsideration, arguing due process violations and non-compliance with dismissal procedures. The Appeals Board denied the petition, finding the applicant's objections vague and lacking specific reasons for the lack of prosecution despite ample opportunity. A dissenting opinion argued that the dismissal constituted an abuse of discretion as the applicant had indicated an intention to prosecute the claim.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Order Dismissing Applicationswithout prejudicePetition for Dismissallack of activity and prosecutionNotice of Intent to Dismiss Applicationsobjections overruleddue process rights violatedCalifornia Code of Regulations title 8 section 10582
References
Case No. ADJ2652722 (VNO 0436560)
Regular
Jul 31, 2015

ABDULLAH JOMAA vs. ROOHANIS 76 STATION, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION For FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY, In Liquidation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a WCJ's order allowing a physician's lien. The defendant argued it was denied due process due to lack of notice regarding the lien and subsequent proceedings. The WCAB found the defendant was indeed denied due process because they did not receive adequate notice of the lien claim or the proceedings. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien conferenceDue processNoticeDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedStatute of limitationsLachesOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseNotice of Intention to allow lien
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,120 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