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. ADJ18961005
Regular
Sep 23, 2025

JAQUELINE GARCIA vs. AMAZON.COM, INC.; LIBERTY MUTUAL

Applicant Jaqueline Garcia petitioned for reconsideration after a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) determined she was an independent contractor, not an employee of Amazon.com, Inc., when she sustained injuries. The Appeals Board granted the petition, citing concerns over the WCJ's application of the burden of proof regarding employment status and the evidential weight given to the 'Amazon Flex Independent Contractor Terms of Service' document. The Board emphasized that the record did not clearly establish if the applicant met her initial burden or if the defendant successfully rebutted the employment presumption under applicable codes. Consequently, a final decision on the merits of the reconsideration is deferred to allow for further review of the factual and legal issues.

Amazon FlexIndependent ContractorProposition 22ABC TestDynamexBusiness and Professions Code 7451ReconsiderationFindings of FactPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ15605011 ADJ16563992
Regular
Sep 02, 2025

ATEFA SAMADI vs. AMAZON

The applicant, Atefa Samadi, filed a Petition for Disqualification against the WCJ following an expedited hearing. The Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and denied the petition on the merits, citing Labor Code section 5311 and Code of Civil Procedure section 641, which govern the grounds for disqualification. The WCAB found that the petition did not present sufficient facts to establish disqualification, and a judge's expressions of opinion or erroneous rulings in the discharge of official duties are not evidence of bias. The WCJ's report detailed past hearings where the applicant exhibited disruptive behavior and the WCJ's attempts to ensure due process while managing complex issues.

Petition for DisqualificationLabor Code section 5311Code of Civil Procedure section 641WCJ biasunqualified opinionenmitybiasWCAB Rule 10960affidavitdeclaration
References
Case No. ADJ20307046
Regular
Apr 01, 2025

FRANK UWAKWE vs. AMAZON COM INC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION

Applicant Frank Uwakwe sought reconsideration of an Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR), arguing he did not understand the settlement terms and that the OACR failed to consider all claimed injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) received a Report and Recommendation from the WCJ suggesting the Petition be treated as one to set aside the OACR and returned to the trial level. Citing its continuing jurisdiction and contract principles, the WCAB dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as premature. The matter is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to consider the petition as one to set aside the OACR, conduct further proceedings, and potentially order medical-legal reporting.

Petition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseSet Aside OACRMeeting of the MindsMutual ConsentContract PrinciplesGood CauseDue ProcessFair Hearing
References
Case No. ADJ2795638 (RIV 0079398), ADJ1788588 (SDO 0364199)
Regular
Oct 28, 2013

GUADALUPE SOLARES vs. FLEX TEMP, dba LABOR FINDERS, AIG INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed a Petition for Reconsideration because it was untimely filed. Even if it were timely, the WCAB would have denied it based on the Judge's report, which cited the lien claimant's failure to appear at a lien conference in person as required. The lien claimant's objection to a dismissal notice was also late and failed to demonstrate good cause. Therefore, the petition is dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissal OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeLien ClaimantObjectionNotice of Intention to DismissTimelinessGood CauseLien Conference
References
Case No. ADJ8969504
Regular
Sep 12, 2016

GLADYS PAZ, vs. TECH FLEX; SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY, TRI-COUNTY MEDICAL GROUP

This case concerns the timeliness of a lien claim filed by Tri-County Medical Group for services rendered to applicant Gladys Paz. The lien was filed on October 19, 2015, more than 18 months after the last date of service on December 23, 2013. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision that the lien is barred by the 18-month limitation period in Labor Code section 4903.5(a) for services provided on or after July 1, 2013. The Board found that the amended statute applied and lien claimant had a reasonable time to file within 18 months of their last service date.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantLabor Code Section 4903.5(a)Statute of LimitationsReconsiderationFindings and OrderAdministrative Law JudgeContinuous ServicesEffective DateRetroactive Application
References
Showing 1-5 of 5 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