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. ADJ6937263
Regular
Sep 09, 2014

PAUL ESCUDERO vs. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Cisco Systems' petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant's claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that Cisco failed to prove the applicant had actual knowledge of his workers' compensation rights. Specifically, the employer did not provide legally required notices, and the applicant's vague consultation with a civil attorney did not constitute sufficient actual knowledge to start the statute of limitations. The Board also noted that actual knowledge cannot be imputed solely by an employee's representation by counsel.

Statute of limitationsTollingActual knowledgeWorkers' compensation rightsEmployer noticeCivil attorneyImputed knowledgePetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative law judge
References
Case No. ADJ10425864, ADJ7159539
Regular
Dec 24, 2018

GHASSAN MOSRIE vs. CHURCH OF THE CHIMES, GUIDEONE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding a prior finding that the applicant's 2008 injury claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The Board determined that imputed knowledge from the applicant's attorney does not constitute actual knowledge for tolling purposes. The employer's failure to provide statutory notice of rights, coupled with the applicant's lack of actual knowledge, prejudiced the applicant. Therefore, the Board found the applicant's claim for the November 8, 2008 injury is not barred by the statute of limitations, deferring other issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsTollingClaim FormNotice of Potential EligibilityWaiverMandatory Settlement ConferenceAffirmative DefenseActual Knowledge
References
Case No. ADJ8739571
Regular
Dec 11, 2015

MARVIN BENARD vs. SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS, ACE INSURANCE COMPANY, U.S. FIDELITY AND GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's decision, finding the applicant's claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The Board determined the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the applicant had actual knowledge of his workers' compensation rights more than one year before filing his claim. Crucially, the defendant did not provide notice of these rights, and the applicant's knowledge of his injury's industrial cause did not equate to knowledge of his rights to benefits. Therefore, the case was returned for further proceedings.

Cumulative traumaStatute of limitationsDate of injuryKnowledge of rightsTollingAffirmative defenseReconsiderationBurden of proofProfessional athleteNotice of rights
References
Case No. ADJ7109517
Regular
May 05, 2011

DWAYNE RUDD vs. OAKLAND RAIDERS AND ACE/USA, Administered by ESIS, TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by NOVA PRO RISK SOLUTIONS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a prior decision and found applicant Dwayne Rudd's claim barred by the statute of limitations. Despite the WCJ finding defendants estopped to assert the defense due to notice violations, the Board determined Rudd possessed actual knowledge of his workers' compensation rights. This knowledge was evidenced by his signing of a DWC-1 form and retaining multiple law firms to pursue prior, dismissed claims for the same cumulative trauma injury. Therefore, the Board concluded there was no prejudice from the lack of notice, and the claim was untimely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDwayne RuddOakland RaidersACE/USATampa Bay BuccaneersNova Pro Risk Solutionsindustrial cumulative traumaprofessional football playerstatute of limitationsestoppel
References
Case No. ADJ10431269 ADJ10588231
Regular
Feb 26, 2018

JUAN ALVARADO vs. DISCOVERY FOODS, LLC, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding a prior decision. The Board found that the employer, Discovery Foods, LLC, failed to prove applicant Juan Alvarado was adequately notified of his workers' compensation rights. Crucially, Labor Code section 5401(b) mandates notices be in both English and Spanish, and Alvarado does not read English. The Board clarified that general knowledge of the workers' compensation system does not equate to actual knowledge of potential eligibility for a specific injury. Finally, the employer waived the defense of laches by failing to raise it at trial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5401(b)Spanish language noticeActual knowledgePrejudiceStatute of limitationsTollingLachesWaiver
References
Case No. ADJ8272258, ADJ8272266, ADJ2228296, and ADJ2477053
Regular
Apr 06, 2015

JAMES PATTEN vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Sacramento's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's findings. The Board found that the applicant's 1992 and 1996 industrial injuries were not barred by the statute of limitations. This decision was based on the employer's failure to provide proper notice of rights, tolling the statute, and the defendant's failure to prove the statute's applicability. The Board also affirmed the findings of industrial psychiatric injury, noting stipulations and evidence supporting actual employment as the predominant cause.

Statute of Limitations TollingIndustrial InjurySpine InjuryPsyche InjuryCumulative InjuryDate of InjuryCompensable ConsequenceActual KnowledgeEmployer KnowledgeNotice of Benefits
References
Case No. LBO 0367320
Regular
Mar 03, 2008

MARIA ESTRADA vs. SERVICE MASTER AT WHITE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an order dismissing a lien claim due to defective service on the lien claimant's representative. The representative was added to the official address record after the dismissal order was issued and not served. The lien claimant's petition for reconsideration was timely filed within 20 days of the representative's actual knowledge of the order. The case is returned to the trial level for further review and decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantService MasterZurich North AmericaSouth Lake Medical CenterPaul CohenCompromise and ReleaseWCJNotice of Intention to Dismiss
References
Case No. ADJ9223382
Regular
Jul 06, 2015

MICHAEL NEU vs. LOS ANGELES DODGERS, OAKLAND ATHLETICS, FLORIDA MARLINS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Los Angeles Dodgers' petition for reconsideration, affirming an earlier award for the applicant. The Board found the Dodgers, as a California-based team, were not exempt from notice requirements regarding workers' compensation rights. Furthermore, the statute of limitations was tolled because the Dodgers failed to prove the applicant had actual knowledge of his rights more than one year before filing his claim. Consequently, the applicant's claim for industrial injury to his neck and right shoulder was upheld.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardMichael NeuLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsFlorida MarlinsAce American Insurance CompanyADJ9223382industrial injuryneckright shoulder
References
Case No. ADJ4612779 (RDG 0113043), ADJ1750033 (RDG 0129403), ADJ4527180 (RDG 0129951)
Regular
Apr 17, 2014

JUAN VILLALOBOS vs. COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves appeals regarding the statute of limitations for applicant Juan Villalobos's workers' compensation claims against Coca Cola Bottling Company. The Board affirmed the lower judge's decision that claims ADJ4527180 and ADJ1750033 were not barred by the statute of limitations. This was based on the employer's failure to provide proper notice of potential benefits, which tolled the statute, and the employer's inability to prove the applicant had actual knowledge of his rights. The Board found the employer's amended petitions for reconsideration procedurally acceptable, but ultimately affirmed the original findings on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition to ReopenStatute of LimitationsCumulative InjuryPetition to StrikeVerified PetitionActual KnowledgeLabor Code Section 5401(a)Tolling
References
Case No. ADJ7011076
Regular
Jan 07, 2014

Richard Maddern vs. City of Stockton, Corvel Corporation

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision finding an applicant police officer's 1995 cervical spine injury claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. The Board found the employer failed to provide required notice of workers' compensation rights under former Rule 9882. A March 1997 letter from the adjustor was insufficient as it did not cover all required information and applicant was unrepresented at that time. The Board concluded the employer failed to prove the applicant had actual knowledge of his rights from another source, thus tolling the statute of limitations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsPolice OfficerCervical Spine InjuryPermanent Disability BenefitsQualified Medical EvaluatorQME ReportActual KnowledgeRule 9882
References
Showing 1-10 of 563 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