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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. VNO 0386181
Regular
Apr 05, 2007

SUSAN PASCALE vs. BLUE CROSS/WELLPOINT DENTAL, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION on behalf of FREMONT INDEMNITY

This case concerns applicant Susan Pascale's claim for workers' compensation benefits due to industrial injuries resulting in fibromyalgia and other conditions. The WCJ awarded 80% permanent disability, apportioning 20% to applicant's pre-existing personality traits based on medical opinions. The Appeals Board affirmed this decision, finding the apportionment was supported by substantial medical evidence of causation, as allowed by recent statutory changes.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSusan PascaleBlue Cross/Wellpoint DentalCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationFremont IndemnityVNO 0386181Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationApplicantDefendantWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ11393841
Regular
Dec 26, 2019

WILLIAM GONZALEZ vs. GOODFELLOW TOP GRADE CONSTRUCTION, AIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. While the applicant's petition was deemed timely filed within the statutory period, the WCAB found that the applicant was not an "aggrieved person" as required by Labor Code Section 5900(a). The dismissal is based on the reasoning provided by the workers' compensation administrative law judge.

Petition for ReconsiderationAggrieved PartyWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportStipulation and OrderTimelinessServicePersonal ServiceE-mailMail
References
Case No. ADJ8965574, ADJ8974974
Regular
Aug 08, 2014

Adriana Godoy vs. Destination Shuttle Services, Tower Castlepoint Insurance

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an order that dismissed Crenshaw Multi Specialty Medical Group's lien. The Board found that the Administrative Law Judge erred in dismissing the lien for failure to pay a filing fee because Crenshaw had not yet formally filed its lien claim. Therefore, the fee requirement was not applicable at the time of the lien trial, and the dismissal order was invalid. The Board affirmed that Crenshaw qualified as a "person aggrieved" and its petition for reconsideration was timely filed.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien TrialLien Filing FeeDue ProcessLabor Code 4903.05Compromise and Release AgreementDeclaration of ReadinessLien ClaimantAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ14015513
Regular
Feb 15, 2023

BRADEN NANEZ vs. 3 STONEDEGGS, INC., TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE COMPANY, AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board rescinded the initial Findings and Order, finding the applicant's petition for reconsideration was timely due to defective service. The Board applied the commercial traveler rule, determining the applicant's injury arose out of and in the course of employment. The claim is not barred by the going and coming rule or intoxication, and the applicant sustained a fractured right femur. Issues of traumatic brain injury and bruised lung are deferred for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationOpinion and DecisionFindings and OrderApplicantEmployerAdjustedAdjudication NumberRedding District OfficeInjury Arising Out of and In the Course of Employment (AOE/COE)
References
Case No. ADJ7550460
Regular
Oct 12, 2015

MILAGROS ARBILDO vs. COUNTRY VILLA NOVATO HEALTH SERVICES, ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by the defendant regarding the closure of discovery. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied removal, adopting the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) report. The WCJ found the defendant lacked diligence in scheduling the deposition of Dr. Mays, a key medical evaluator, delaying it for four months after receiving his report. The WCAB concluded that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy for the defendant if aggrieved by a final decision.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationFinal DecisionAggrievedStipulations
References
Case No. ADJ7232076
En Banc
Sep 26, 2011

Tsegay Messele vs. Pitco Foods, Inc.; California Insurance Company

The Appeals Board holds that the 10-day period for agreeing on an AME under Labor Code § 4062.2(b) is extended by five days when the initial proposal is served by mail, and clarifies the method for calculating this time period, finding both parties' panel requests premature.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTsegay MesselePitco FoodsInc.California Insurance CompanyADJ7232076Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationOrder Granting RemovalDecision After RemovalEn Banc
References
Case No. ADJ8957075
Regular
Nov 09, 2015

JUAN CARLOS HERNANDEZ vs. EARTH TEXTILE DEVELOPMENT, LLC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration because he lacked standing. The applicant was not a "person aggrieved" by the disallowance of a lien claimant's reimbursement, as he had settled his claim and had no direct or indirect financial interest in the lien. Therefore, the applicant could not appeal the decision regarding the lien claimant's medical treatment expenses.

Propria personaPetition for ReconsiderationDisallowed LienGarfield Health Care Center Medical GroupACOEM GuidelinesCompromise and Release AgreementAggrievedLabor Code Section 5900Lien ClaimantSelf-Procured Medical Treatment
References
Case No. ADJ11116151
Regular
Jun 11, 2018

JOSE VILLANUEVA vs. VALLARTA SUPERMARKETS, SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Removal filed by Jose Villanueva. This dismissal occurred because the underlying matter had already proceeded to trial and been submitted to a new administrative law judge. The WCAB clarified that any party aggrieved by the eventual decision can seek reconsideration at that time.

Petition for RemovalMootWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJReconsiderationDismissalTrialAggrieved PersonSubmittedAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. MON 109851 MON 281527
Regular
Jun 27, 2007

ANGELICA GABRIELLA vs. TAD TECHNICAL SERVICES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a lien claimant's petition for reconsideration of a stipulated award. The lien claimant argued the award was premature as their lien for fibromyalgia treatment was not resolved, but the Board found the claimant was not aggrieved by the award. The award did not adjudicate the lien, and the claimant remains free to pursue their claim independently.

Stipulations with Request for AwardLien claimantReconsiderationDismissalIndustrial injuryPermanent disabilityFibromyalgiaAgreed Medical ExaminerCausationLabor Code section 5900(a)
References
Showing 1-10 of 899 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