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. ADJ8656037
Regular
Mar 18, 2019

STERLING FORBES vs. HARLEM GLOBETROTTERS, TRAVELERS DALLAS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to study factual and legal issues in Sterling Forbes' case against Harlem Globetrotters and Travelers. However, the parties have since negotiated a settlement. Consequently, the WCAB has rescinded the WCJ's August 22, 2017 Findings and Award. The case is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to determine the reasonableness of the proposed settlement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSettlementFindings and AwardRescindedReturned to Trial LevelWCJReasonableness of SettlementNegotiated SettlementInjured Worker
References
Case No. ADJ10012350
Regular
May 17, 2017

JAIME MEDINA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded its January 13, 2017 Findings and Award in this case. This action was taken because the parties have reached a settlement agreement. The case is now returned to the trial level for the Workers' Compensation Judge to review the adequacy of the settlement. If the settlement is not approved, the previous award may be reinstated.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationSettlementFindings and AwardRescindedReturned to Trial LevelAdequacy of SettlementAdministrative Law JudgePermissibly Self-InsuredStatus Quo Ante
References
Case No. ADJ7525233; ADJ7525240
Regular
Jul 22, 2011

Stephanie Ritchon vs. FREMONT MEDICAL CENTER, KAISER

The Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, rescinding the trial judge's February 16, 2011 orders. The Board found that the trial judge acted prematurely and potentially inappropriately by suspending action on stipulations, threatening sanctions without a hearing, and making comments beyond her rulings. The matters are returned to the trial level for further status conferences to determine applicant's desires regarding further litigation, psychiatric claims, PQME waivers, and the adequacy of the proposed settlements. The Board also clarified that the need for rebuttal under *Guzman* and *Ogilvie* will be addressed after these preliminary issues are resolved.

Petition for RemovalPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleMilpitas Unified School District v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Guzman)Ogilvie v. City and County of San FranciscoWCJ ImpartialityPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator (PQME)Stipulations with Request for AwardOrder Suspending Action on SettlementStatus Conference on AdequacySection 132a Claim
References
Case No. ADJ4364152
Regular
Oct 14, 2008

PATRICIA A. NEWTON vs. SBC PACIFIC BELL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior July 30, 2008 Joint Findings and Order because the applicant's attorney informed the Board that the case was being settled. The case is remanded to the trial level, where the WCJ will either re-issue the original decision if settlement is not finalized within 30 days, or proceed with settlement approval or other appropriate action if settlement papers are timely filed. This order allows the parties to finalize their settlement while preserving their rights.

ReconsiderationRescinded OrderRemandedTrial LevelSettlementTentative SettlementWCJJoint Findings and OrderFinalized SettlementAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ12518707; ADJ12518708; ADJ12518731
Regular
Feb 13, 2023

BESSIE TRIPLETT vs. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded three Orders Approving Compromise and Release (OACRs) issued by a WCJ, finding them inadequate due to a lack of evidence, unclear terms regarding indemnity, illegible provisions, and conflicting language within addenda and the main body of the agreements. The Board noted the parties failed to provide medical reports or explain the basis for indemnity "according to proof" and highlighted inconsistencies in the settlement's scope and the improper settlement of supplemental job displacement benefits. Consequently, the matters were returned to the trial level for further proceedings to determine the adequacy of the proposed settlements.

Compromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportMedical RecordsDue ProcessQualified Medical-Legal ExaminationDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedMotion to CompelMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ6827349
Regular
Sep 21, 2012

RONALD JOLLIFFE vs. THOMAS HYDRAULIC & HARDWARE SUPPLY, INC., PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Defendant's Petition for Removal, which sought to rescind the judge's order to correct a settlement agreement and increase Medicare Set Aside funding. The judge had suspended action on the Compromise and Release due to concerns about the settlement's adequacy regarding medical treatment costs and Medicare. The WCAB found that the judge had not yet determined the settlement's adequacy and therefore denied removal, returning the case for trial on that issue and other litigable matters.

Petition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseMedicare Set AsideCMS determinationSecond Order Suspending ActionWCJadequacy of settlementtrial levellitigable issuesSocial Security Disability Insurance
References
Case No. ADJ2615603 (SAC0369648), ADJ6850601
Regular
Apr 05, 2023

JAMES CHADWICK vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review a settlement agreement between applicant James Chadwick and the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund. Following a settlement conference, the parties submitted a Compromise and Release. The Board found the settlement amount to be adequate and in the applicant's best interest, and also deemed the requested attorneys' fee reasonable. Therefore, the Board rescinded the prior Findings of Fact and Order and approved the Compromise and Release.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSubsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundCompromise and ReleaseOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5001Labor Code Section 5002WCAB Rule 10700(b)Findings of Fact and OrderWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeCommissioners' Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ3641046 (MON 0310454) ADJ3854227 (MON 0310453)
Regular
Apr 23, 2015

CARLEAN BARNES vs. SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation claim against the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further review the issues. The parties have now submitted a Compromise and Release Agreement for a settlement. The Board has rescinded the prior award and returned the case to the trial level for the judge to consider the settlement's adequacy. If the settlement is not approved, the judge may issue a new decision.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundReconsiderationCompromise and Release AgreementRescindedReturned to Trial LevelWCJ ConsiderationAdequacy of SettlementFindings and AwardOrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ9171209
Regular
Mar 19, 2019

MARIA VILLICANA vs. MOPKIN, uninsured, MITSUWA MARKETPLACE, SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding that neither party can unilaterally withdraw from a fully executed Compromise and Release settlement agreement before it is approved or disapproved. The Board rescinded the prior order suspending the settlement and clarified that the agreement remains binding until a formal decision is made. The case was returned to the trial level for a hearing to determine the adequacy of the settlement. The applicant's original finding, stating she could not withdraw, was affirmed but amended to apply to both parties.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationUninsured EmployerMitsuwa MarketplaceSompo Japan InsuranceBroadsireWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAdequacy of SettlementDue Process
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,933 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