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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ3616652 (SAC 0296975)
Regular
Feb 07, 2013

SAMUEL WILLIAMS vs. STARVING STUDENTS, LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case concerns the applicant's claim for interest on a workers' compensation settlement paid late by Legion Insurance, now administered by CIGA. The applicant was awarded 10% interest on delayed payments, but CIGA sought reconsideration, arguing the interest issue was not properly raised, interest accrued before CIGA's involvement is not covered, and stipulations waived interest. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the award to apply interest only on payments made on or after March 4, 2003, when CIGA assumed liability, allowing credit for overpayments made to the applicant.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardLegion InsuranceCIGACompromise and Release AgreementInterest on AwardLiquidationGuarantorStipulationOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseStatutory Interest
References
Case No. ADJ1367543 (POM 0286181)
Regular
May 11, 2012

XJU BIN CAO vs. WO HIN INTERNATIONAL, INC., BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's decision, finding that the November 3, 2010 Stipulation and Order was an enforceable contract despite the parties' differing interpretations of unstated interest and penalty clauses. The Board ruled the lien claimant is entitled to interest under Labor Code section 5800 on the $17,000 payment from the agreement date to payment. However, no penalty was awarded as the defendant's delay in payment was not deemed unreasonable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationStipulation and OrderMeeting of the MindsLabor Code Section 5800Lien ClaimantInterestPenaltiesLabor Code Section 5814Unreasonable Delay
References
Case No. ADJ10652454
Regular
Apr 17, 2018

GARY STRICKLAND vs. CAMINO UNION ELEMENTARY, SCHOOLS INSURANCE AUTHORITY

This case is dismissed because the Petition for Reconsideration was not verified as required by Labor Code section 5902. The petitioner was notified of this defect by the WCJ's report and failed to cure it within a reasonable time. Additionally, the petitioner did not comply with Appeals Board Rule 10778 regarding proof of service of notice of adverse interest to the applicant's attorney. These procedural defects mandate the dismissal of the petition.

Petition for ReconsiderationVerifiedLabor Code section 5902Cal. Code Regs.tit. 8§ 10450(e)Lucena v. Diablo Auto BodyUnverified PetitionNotice of DefectCure Defect
References
Case No. ADJ11024778
Regular
Jan 04, 2019

TIMOTHY EARNEST vs. CALIFORNIA STATE FAIR, CALIFORNIA FAIR SERVICES AUTHORITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Timothy Earnest's Petition for Reconsideration. Although the Board found the petition timely filed, it was ultimately dismissed due to the applicant's attorney's failure to comply with Appeals Board Rule 10778. This rule requires proof of service on the applicant regarding the attorney's adverse interest and the applicant's right to independent counsel when requesting an increased attorney's fee.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeCompromise and ReleaseProof of ServiceAppeals Board Rule 10778Attorney's FeeAdverse InterestIndependent CounselDismissal
References
Case No. ADJ3066350 (RIV 0081274)
Regular
Jun 07, 2011

RICHARD KAUTZER vs. KENNY STRICKLAND, INC./ HEMET OIL CO.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Richard Kautzer's petition for reconsideration in this case. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning for the denial. Additionally, the Board noted that the applicant's attorney failed to comply with WCAB Rule 10778 regarding notification to the applicant of adverse interests and rights to independent counsel when requesting a fee increase. This procedural deficiency could have been grounds for dismissing the fee increase request.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardKenny StricklandHemet Oil Co.State Compensation Insurance FundADJ3066350RIV 0081274Order Denying ReconsiderationWCAB Rule 10778increased feeadverse interest
References
Case No. ADJ1601260 (VNO 0434802)
Regular
Dec 15, 2008

SIMON GARCIA, JR. vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration to allow attorney fees on the applicant's life pension award. While affirming the original award, the Board deferred the issue of attorney fees pending an investigation into whether counsel adequately notified the applicant of his right to independent counsel and counsel's adverse interest per CCR §10778. The WCJ will determine compliance with this notice requirement upon remand.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityAttorney FeeLife PensionReopening ClaimLien ClaimantWCJAdverse Interest
References
Case No. ADJ771611 (SRO 0139566)
Regular
Jan 06, 2011

THEODORA POLLACK vs. THE INN AT OCCIDENTAL, PREFERRED EMPLOYEES

This order denies the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a previous decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report in their decision. Additionally, the applicant's attorney's request for an increased fee was denied for failing to comply with WCAB Rule 10778 concerning notice of adverse interest and the applicant's right to independent counsel. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration is officially denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDENYING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeWCJWCAB Rule 10778proof of serviceadverse interestindependent counselattorney's fee
References
Case No. ADJ3632180 (AHM0148830)
Regular
Jan 28, 2010

L.IIDA BUIE vs. CCK FOOD SERVICES, INC.; FARMERS SANTA ANA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's attorney's petition for reconsideration of an award denying attorney's fees. The Board found the attorney failed to comply with Appeals Board Rule 10778, which requires written notice to the applicant of the attorney's adverse interest when seeking an increased fee. The WCJ also determined the case was not of above-average complexity, and the attorney's actions led to a credit for the Employment Development Department. Consequently, the petition for reconsideration was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAttorney's FeesFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityMedical TreatmentStipulationNewly Discovered EvidenceAdministrative Law JudgeAdverse Interest
References
Case No. ADJ910786 (VNO 0383692)
Regular
Oct 20, 2016

STEVE BOWERS vs. TELESIS COLLISION CENTER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The applicant argued that the initial award incorrectly excluded injury to his cervical spine and upper extremities, and that apportionment by the Agreed Medical Evaluator was flawed. The Board denied the petition, adopting the Judge's report and recommendation to deny the reconsideration. Furthermore, the applicant's attorney's request for an increased fee was denied due to non-compliance with procedural rules regarding notification of adverse interests to the client.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDFindings and Awardindustrial injurylower backAgreed Medical EvaluatorapportionmentPetition for ReconsiderationWCJattorney's feesWCAB Rule 10778
References
Showing 1-10 of 778 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