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. 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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ6690678
Regular
May 24, 2012

PEDRO RAMIREZ vs. PCL CONSTRUCTION, RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT

In **Ramirez v. PCL Construction**, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the applicant's Petition for Removal. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge, finding no basis to grant the removal. Notably, the WCAB clarified that the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) is not involved, and therefore, a reference to "other insurance" in the judge's report was disregarded. The decision effectively upholds the status quo of the case as determined by the administrative law judge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalWCJ ReportDenying RemovalCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGAOther InsuranceAdministrative Law JudgeLabor LawIndustrial Accident
References
Case No. ADJ4609174 (RDG 0041947)
Regular
Oct 27, 2010

DOYLE CANADA vs. REDDING POWER SAWMILL DIVISION, ESIS PORTLAND

In this Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, Doyle Canada's petition for reconsideration was denied. The Board adopted the findings of the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge, whose report detailed the reasons for the denial. This order, dated October 27, 2010, upholds the original decision and denies further review. The defendants were Redding Power Sawmill Division and ESIS Portland.

WCABPetition for Reconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgereport of the workers' compensation administrative law judgedeny reconsiderationADJ4609174Redding Power Sawmill DivisionESIS PortlandDoyle CanadaADJUDICATION
References
Case No. ADJ9230683
Regular
Jul 07, 2014

JOSE GARCIA, Jorge Garcia, JORGE LUIS GARCIA vs. RAMTEX INC.; EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, RAMTEX INCORPORATED, EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by applicant Jose Garcia challenging an administrative law judge's discovery rulings. The applicant sought specific documents, including witness statements and employee handbooks, which the defendant claimed did not exist. The judge ordered the production of the personnel file but denied the request for other documents, finding the defendant's representations credible and applicant's discovery requests lacking due diligence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, adopting the judge's reasoning that the petition was untimely and that no prejudice or irreparable harm resulted from the discovery rulings.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRamtex Inc.Employers Compensation Insurance CompanyADJ9230683Administrative Law JudgeReport of Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeVerified AnswerGood Faith InvestigationDeposition of Applicant
References
Case No. ADJ9268751
Regular
Jul 03, 2017

THITIKORN GALBRAITH vs. JAMES E. FITZGERALD, D.D.S., INC., EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant Preferred Employers Insurance Company (PEIC) sought reconsideration of an administrative law judge's (ALJ) order denying reformation of a Compromise and Release and finding another defendant joined in error. PEIC argued the ALJ should not have ruled on the matter, as a different judge initially approved the settlement. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied PEIC's petition, finding it procedurally defective and untimely filed as a disqualification request. Therefore, PEIC's attempt to challenge the ALJ's authority after the decision was unsuccessful.

Compromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrdersWCJJudge AssignmentDisqualificationWCAB Rule 10452Labor Code section 5311TimelinessRemoval
References
Case No. ADJ7621915
Regular
Jun 12, 2014

MIRIAN OCHOA vs. SODEXHO, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Sodexho, Inc.'s Petition for Removal in the case of Mirian Ochoa. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's report and found that the petitioner may have materially misrepresented the record. The Board noted that the judge may investigate sanctions for this potential violation of WCAB Rule 10561(b)(5)(A). Consequently, the Petition for Removal was denied.

Petition for RemovalWCAB Rule 10561(b)(5)(A)Materially misrepresentedSanctionsWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeDeny removalReport of the workers' compensation administrative law judgeADJ7621915SODEXHOINC.
References
Case No. ADJ10033793
Regular
Aug 14, 2017

MARIA BARRERA vs. PRESTIGE CLEANERS, INC., PROCENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Maria Barrera's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's (WCALJ) decision that Barrera failed to prove her claimed injuries arose out of and occurred in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The WCALJ properly weighed the medical evidence, finding the opinion of QME Dr. Lipson, who found no evidence of industrial injury, to be more persuasive than the treating physicians' reports. Barrera's petition did not meet procedural requirements and lacked substantial evidence to overturn the WCALJ's findings.

Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedOpinion and OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport of Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeSubstantial EvidencePhysician's OpinionCausationInjury AOE/COE
References
Case No. ADJ4602378 (POM 0300098), ADJ3708085 (POM 0300213), ADJ7098978
Regular
Dec 20, 2016

LISA PENILLA vs. STARBUCKS COFFEE CO.; GALLAGHER BASSETT

In *Lisa Penilla v. Starbucks Coffee Co.*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal. The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's report, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result from denial. Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only when reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy. The applicant failed to meet this high burden, and rulings made during the MSC can be addressed by the trial judge.

Petition for RemovalAppeals BoardWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationExtraordinary RemedyMSC JudgeTrial Judge
References
Showing 1-10 of 8,123 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