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. ADJ3283274 (VNO 0386537) ADJ4545965 (VNO 0386536) ADJ3421140 (VNO 0347301)
Regular
Jan 25, 2010

BARBARA STRAUSS vs. WEST MARINE, INC., CIGA for RELIANCE in liquidation, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY, FIREMAN'S FUND

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denying reconsideration. The error involved the incorrect assignment of ADJ and VNO numbers to the relevant case numbers. The WCAB is correcting this error to accurately reflect the case numbers as ADJ3283274 and VNO 0386537. This correction ensures proper record-keeping for applicant Barbara Strauss and defendants West Marine, Inc., et al.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Denying ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeClerical ErrorCorrected Case NumberADJ NumberVNO NumberReversal of NumbersLiquidation
References
Case No. ADJ15751788
Regular
Jul 18, 2025

OLGA BENITEZ vs. MISSION FOODS, ARCH INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued an order on July 18, 2025, to rectify a clerical error in a prior decision dated May 29, 2025, concerning case number ADJ15751788. The error involved the omission of the case number from the caption of the earlier Opinion and Order Granting Petition For Reconsideration and Decision After Reconsideration. The Board clarified that this correction was made without the need for granting reconsideration, citing that such errors can be corrected at any time. Additionally, an earlier Petition for Removal, related to the same parties, was dismissed on May 29, 2025, subsequent to its withdrawal by the petitioner.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClerical ErrorOpinion and OrderCase NumberPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdjudication NumberGallagher Bassett ServicesArch Indemnity InsuranceMission Foods
References
Case No. ADJ12575364
Regular
Nov 25, 2020

MIGUEL SOLIS vs. KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, SOMPO AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that overturned the Medical Unit's denial of a specialty change for a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel. The WCAB found that while they have jurisdiction to review Medical Unit decisions, the applicant did not meet the standard for vacating the chiropractic QME panel. The WCAB held that a chiropractor can evaluate disputed medical issues, even with referrals to other specialists, as long as they stay within their scope of practice and report any issues outside their expertise. Therefore, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order and directed the parties to utilize the original chiropractic QME panel.

QME panelMedical Unitspecialty disputeorthopedic surgerychiropracticAdjudication NumberPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderLabor Codesubstantial evidence
References
Case No. ADJ20165742
Regular
Jul 18, 2025

DEBRA SILVEIRA vs. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INCORPORATED

Applicant Debra Silveira sought reconsideration of an April 29, 2025 Findings of Fact and Order, which deemed a Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) panel valid despite being requested by defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Incorporated, with an incorrect claim number. The Appeals Board granted the petition, rescinded the prior decision, and substituted new findings. The Board ruled that strict compliance with Administrative Director Rule 30 regarding complete and correct claim numbers for QME panel requests is required to ensure due process and prevent conflicting or overlapping panels. Consequently, the defendant's panel (7773036) was deemed invalid, and the applicant's panel (7775940) was declared valid.

QME panel validityincorrect claim numberAD Rule 30due processadministrative law judgePetition for Reconsiderationremoval standardDWC Medical Unitprocedural defectinadvertent error
References
Case No. ADJ7622191 ADJ10153210 ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258)
Regular
Aug 05, 2019

CATHERINA DE LAY vs. CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL, DIGNITY HEALTH, TRAVELERS

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision from July 19, 2019. The error resulted in the misidentification of adjudication numbers in the original decision. The Board is correcting this clerical error without granting reconsideration, as such errors can be amended at any time. The amended caption now accurately includes all relevant case numbers: ADJ7622191, ADJ10153210, ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), and ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258).

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardclerical errorOpinion and DecisionReconsiderationadjudication numbersSuperior Nationalliquidationpermissibly self-insuredCIGADignity Health
References
Case No. ADJ8221321
Regular
Nov 09, 2020

ANTHONY PAUL MAGOULAS, PAUL MAGOULAS (deceased) vs. LAS POSAS COUNTRY CLUB, HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDMENITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the original findings and returned the case to trial for further proceedings. The Board determined the death benefit claim was timely filed under Labor Code § 5406, even though it was erroneously filed under the decedent's inter vivos claim number. Additionally, the Board found that dependency is determined at the time of injury, not death, and the original finding of no dependent was legally inaccurate and unsupported by the record. Therefore, the WCAB remanded the case to address the dependency issue and potentially assign a separate adjudication number to the death claim.

WCABReconsiderationDeath ClaimStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5406Inter Vivos ClaimDependencyLabor Code Section 3501Adjudication NumberLiberal Construction
References
Case No. ADJ1504028 (AHM 0081465); ADJ603748 (AHM 0081464)
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

JENNIFER DICORATO vs. BLOOMFIELD BAKERY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

The case involves a petition for removal filed by lien claimant Stuart Silverman, M.D., challenging an order by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The WCJ's order permitted the defendant to substitute a bill review expert witness and allow remote testimony. The Appeals Board, after reviewing the petition, defendant's answer, and the WCJ's report, dismissed the petition. The Board concluded that the issue was not yet ripe for adjudication as no final order or decision regarding the expert witness substitution or remote testimony had been issued by the WCJ. The decision further noted the importance of a complete record and admonished the lien claimant's representative, Dan Escamilla, for misrepresenting facts in the verified petition for removal.

Petition for RemovalLien ClaimantSubstitution of Expert WitnessRemote TestimonyWCJ DecisionNot Ripe for AdjudicationPretrial Conference StatementSubstantial EvidenceAdmitted EvidenceSanctions
References
Case No. ADJ7730913, ADJ8640698, ADJ8233287, ADJ7881756, ADJ8438104, ADJ7467140, ADJ7467243, ADJ9068351, ADJ9081983
Regular
Dec 02, 2016

HOLLIS COPELAND, JR. vs. DENVER NUGGETS, PINNACOL ASSURANCE

This case involved multiple consolidated workers' compensation claims where the Board initially denied reconsideration of an order dismissing Pinnacol Assurance for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Appeals Board is now granting reconsideration on its own motion to correct clerical errors in its prior opinion. Specifically, the Board failed to list all nine adjudication file numbers and did not serve all affected applicants. The decision after reconsideration affirms the original denial of reconsideration but amends the opinion to include all case numbers.

Appeals BoardGranting ReconsiderationOn MotionDecision After ReconsiderationClerical ErrorsPersonal JurisdictionPinnacol AssuranceConsolidated CasesAdjudication File NumbersAffirm Opinion
References
Case No. ADJ10920365; ADJ11395643; ADJ12766536; ADJ11395545; ADJ11182805
Regular
Feb 13, 2023

ROBERT DICK vs. RENN TRANSPORTATION, NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an order dismissing a petition for removal. The petitioner, who had sought to remove a prior decision dated December 13, 2022, voluntarily withdrew their petition. Consequently, the WCAB has formally dismissed the removal petition as requested. This action pertains to multiple adjudication numbers associated with the applicant Robert Dick and defendants Renn Transportation and National Interstate Insurance Company.

Petition for RemovalDismissedWithdrawnWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdjudication NumbersRenn TransportationNational Interstate Insurance CompanyJosé H. RazoKatherine A. ZalewskiCraig Snellings
References
Case No. ADJ1345740 (SAC 0301597), ADJ1463350 (SAC 0208354), ADJ9232740, ADJ10057182
Regular
Dec 02, 2019

LESLIE MEADOWS vs. BRIDGESTONE, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE, DELTA TRUCK CENTER, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURG, LARRY CAIN'S COLLISION CENTER, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, only amending the Amended Joint Findings of Fact, Award, and Order to correct two clerical errors. These errors involved the stated value of the applicant's 13% permanent disability award and the correct adjudication number. The Board reiterated that it has jurisdiction to enforce medical treatment awards, even for conditions arising more than five years post-injury, if they are compensable consequences of the original injury.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFurther Medical TreatmentCompensable ConsequenceDate of InjuryPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Joint Findings of FactAwardOrderClerical Error
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,698 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