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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. 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. ADJ7281695
Regular
Feb 02, 2017

MARIA COSME HERNANDEZ vs. CARDENAS MARKET, INC., PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION INSURANCE GROUP, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the applicant was not a credible witness, giving great weight to the WCJ's observation of her demeanor. The Board also found no substantial evidence to overturn the credibility determination and noted the applicant's failure to meet her burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Furthermore, any objection to the admissibility of defendant's Exhibit A was deemed waived due to the lack of objection at trial.

Petition for ReconsiderationCredibility DeterminationDemeanor on the StandSubstantiality of EvidenceBurden of ProofPreponderance of EvidenceIndustrial InjuryAdmissibility of EvidenceWaived ObjectionWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ7485185, ADJ9885267
Regular
Sep 18, 2017

LAURA ORTIZ vs. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, MID CENTURY INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision denies a petition for reconsideration, affirming the applicant's timely invocation of jurisdiction to seek additional benefits. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the applicant's filings of an Application for Adjudication of Claim and an Amended Application, along with documented medical evidence of worsening condition, satisfied the requirements for reopening and seeking further compensation. These actions put the defendants on notice of the applicant's intent to pursue increased benefits, even without a formal petition to reopen.

Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5410Application for Adjudication of ClaimRiel v. State of CaliforniaBeaida v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.stipulated awardpro perfuture medical treatmentincreased symptomsworsening condition
References
Case No. ADJ12252481 ADJ12252972
Regular
Nov 25, 2019

ROXANNE MAHROOM vs. MAHROOM FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LP, EMPLOYERS PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves applicant Roxanne Mahroom seeking temporary disability (TD) indemnity for a period preceding the WCJ's awarded benefits. The WCAB denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning. The applicant failed to meet her burden of proof to demonstrate entitlement to TD for the disputed period, as she provided no medical evidence or testimony supporting her inability to work during that time. The WCJ's finding of TD from January 25, 2019, and continuing, was supported by substantial evidence.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Temporary Total Disability (TTD)Temporary Disability IndemnitySubstantial EvidenceBurden of ProofMedical EvidenceApplicant's Testimony
References
Case No. ADJ780465 (GOL 0087715), ADJ2934093 (GOL 0087450)
Regular
Sep 20, 2010

JAMES SHEARER vs. ECHTERNACHT CONSTRUCTION; CIGA by CAMBRIDGE for FREMONT COMEPNSATION, in liquidation

This case concerns an applicant seeking reconsideration of findings and awards for two industrial injuries in 1998 and 1999. The applicant argued the judge erred by requiring them to prove apportionment, and that two separate awards were inappropriate under *Benson*. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the applicant had the burden to develop apportionment evidence post-*Benson*. The Board also affirmed separate awards are proper when medical evaluators can apportion disability, and that the applicant's claims of total disability were not supported by substantial medical evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardsApplicantDefendantIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentBurden of ProofBenson v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ9175109
Regular
Feb 05, 2016

GABRIEL GALLAND vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a previous decision, finding the applicant's claim time-barred. The Board determined that the employer provided the applicant with a claim form and notice of benefits on August 13, 2009, which started the statute of limitations. Despite the applicant reporting the injury, there was uncontradicted evidence that he received the claim form. Consequently, the applicant's failure to file his claim within the statutory period after denial resulted in dismissal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStatute of LimitationsPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactLabor Code Section 5405Date of InjuryDisability IndemnityMedical TreatmentTollingEmployer's Report of Occupational Injury
References
Case No. ADJ7970442
Regular
Jul 17, 2013

JOSE AMAYA vs. RIGO'S CUSTOM FURNITURE, INC., PUBLIC SERVICE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns applicant Jose Amaya's claim for workers' compensation benefits, alleging injury to his hernia, back, and extremities while employed as a carpenter. The defendant, Rigo's Custom Furniture, Inc., sought reconsideration of the administrative law judge's (WCJ) decision, primarily arguing the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof and that the claim was barred by the post-termination defense. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report. The WCAB found that even if the applicant was terminated on August 5, 2011, the post-termination defense would not apply because the concurrence of disability and knowledge occurred after that date, falling within a statutory exception.

Post-termination defenseLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)(D)Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantWCJcumulative injuryherniaupper extremities
References
Case No. STK 201844
Regular
Feb 08, 2008

GURMIT JHUTTI vs. FOSTER FARMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the decision finding the applicant did not sustain the alleged injury. The denial was based on the applicant's nearly five-year delay in filing the claim and the fact that the claim was filed on the same day as a reconsideration petition for a prior, related injury case, raising suspicion of a "back-up" strategy. Furthermore, the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof, with unpersuasive testimony and a lack of corroborating evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedApplicantDefendantFoster FarmsGurmit JhuttiSTK 201844Delay in Filing ClaimAOE/COEUnpersuasive Medical Report
References
Case No. ADJ10797237
Regular
Sep 27, 2019

JOHN JENKINS vs. APPLEONE, ACE AMERICAN, GALLAGHER BASSETT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration, adopting the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) report. The Board gave significant weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations based on observing witnesses. The applicant failed to meet the burden of proving industrial causation by a preponderance of the evidence. Therefore, the WCJ's original decision, denying the claim, stands.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportcredibility determinationsburden of proofindustrial causationpreponderance of the evidenceapplicantdefendantVan Nuys District Office
References
Showing 1-10 of 11,083 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