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. ADJ7159838 ADJ7550047
Regular
Jul 29, 2014

ALMA PELAYO vs. ASSOCIATED LIEN SERVICES

Applicant Alma Pelayo sought reconsideration of a prior decision that found no violation of Labor Code section 132(a) and ordered her to take nothing further. Pelayo argued the judge erred in this finding and in failing to rule on the admissibility of her Exhibit 15. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration solely to admit Pelayo's Exhibit 15 and defendant's Exhibits A1, A2, and A3. The Board otherwise affirmed the original decision, meaning Pelayo still takes nothing further.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 132(a)Findings and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationWCJApplicant's Exhibit 15Defendant's Exhibits A1A2A3admissible evidence
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 19, 1993

Claim of Dukes v. Capitol Formation, Inc.

A claimant was injured in an automobile accident in 1971 while on a business trip, resulting in a compensable injury. Over the next two decades, numerous hearings were held regarding medical bill payments and related compensation issues. The parties eventually entered into a stipulated settlement, which included a $75,000 lump-sum payment under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (5-b). The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge denied the claimant’s request to set aside this stipulation, a decision affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The claimant's subsequent application for reconsideration was also denied by the Board. The appeals court dismissed the appeal of the Board’s June 7, 1993 decision as untimely, and affirmed the Board’s August 19, 1993 decision, finding no abuse of discretion in denying the application for reconsideration.

Workers' CompensationStipulated SettlementLump-Sum SettlementReconsiderationUntimely AppealAbuse of DiscretionFraudCollusionMistakeTotal Disability
References
7
Case No. ADJ14871067
Regular
Feb 13, 2023

EDGAR GAMA vs. XTRACTOR DEPOT, LLC, 2020 LONG BEACH, LLC, THE HARTFORD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant was an employee of Xtractor Depot, LLC. The Board gave significant weight to the judge's credibility determination, finding no substantial evidence to warrant overturning it. The Board also noted the petitioner's improper attachment of exhibits to their petition. Ultimately, the applicant's credible testimony and unrebutted exhibits supported the original finding of industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for Reconsideration DeniedWCJ Credibility DeterminationGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Ostensible AuthorityEmployee StatusXtractor Depot LLCAndrew YoonCannabis IndustryWarehouse Explosion
References
4
Case No. ADJ8144649 ADJ8506413
Regular
Jul 07, 2014

ROSA NIEBLAS vs. RUIZ FOODS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's untimely petition for reconsideration. The Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinding the prior award of an industrial injury to the applicant's left knee on April 15, 2010. The Board found this claim barred by the statute of limitations because the applicant failed to provide timely notice of an injury requiring more than first-aid to her employer. Consequently, the applicant will take nothing further.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationStatute of LimitationsIndustrial InjuryJoint Findings and AwardCumulative TraumaWCJTolled StatuteClaim FormNotice of Rights
References
7
Case No. ADJ3860512 (OAK 0238823)
Regular
Feb 18, 2010

, Applicant vs. COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior findings and order. The dismissal was based on the applicant's submission of a petition that grossly exceeded the 25-page limit set by WCAB rules. Additionally, the petition improperly attempted to appeal existing exhibits already in the record. The WCAB warned the applicant of potential sanctions for future non-compliance with filing rules.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDismissalWCJ ReportPage LimitationRule 10845(a)Rule 10232(a)(10)SanctionsLabor Code Section 5813Rule 10561
References
8
Case No. ADJ460346 (STK 0189196) ADJ3032103 (STK 0191252)
Regular
Jun 15, 2009

THERESA MICHELLE DELGADO vs. MERCED CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted By CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC.

This case involves Applicant Theresa Delgado's petition for reconsideration of the Appeals Board's decision to allow further development of the record. The Board had previously rescinded a prior award, deeming the existing psychiatric QME reports stale due to the passage of time and Applicant's return to work. Applicant argued this violated procedural rules regarding exhibit readiness at the Mandatory Settlement Conference. The Board denied the petition, reiterating that its March 23, 2009 decision was an interim procedural order and that updated medical reports are necessary for a determination of current disability, as stale medical evidence does not constitute substantial evidence.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOpinion and OrderFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPsyche InjuryPermanent DisabilityFurther Medical TreatmentMandatory Settlement ConferenceQualified Medical Examiner
References
7
Case No. ADJ7618189
Regular
Nov 26, 2012

RUBEN OROZCO vs. EXACT STAFF, INC.; TOWER/NSM INSUREX, Administered by YORK INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP

This case involves lien claimants Anderson Chiropractic and Santana Lopez seeking reconsideration of an order disallowing their liens. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because a crucial exhibit, Exhibit 6, was incomplete in the record. Lien claimants are ordered to file a complete copy of Exhibit 6 within 10 days to allow the Board to properly review the case. This action is necessary for the Board to study the facts and applicable law concerning the disallowed liens.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsFindings and OrdersDisallowed liensExhibit 6Administrative law judgeWCJSupplemental pleadingSan Francisco
References
0
Case No. ADJ174481 (SAL 0095964)
Regular
Nov 19, 2008

LAURA WILLIAMS-WELTY vs. TILE WEST, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding the 27% permanent disability finding, upholding the WCJ's reliance on the Agreed Medical Evaluator's report. However, the Board granted the applicant's attorney's petition to correct a clerical error regarding his fee. The WCJ's award of $2,750 was amended to reflect a 15% attorney's fee, acknowledging the attorney's extensive work and successful outcomes for the applicant over several years.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorSubstantial EvidenceAttorney's FeePetition to Correct Clerical Error
References
2
Case No. ADJ6899666 ADJ6899667
Regular
Jan 25, 2016

KIMBERLY CHAMBERS vs. UCLA MEDICAL CENTER, Permissibly SelfInsured, Administered By SEDGWICK CMS

This case concerns an applicant's industrial injury causing cardiovascular and digestive system damage. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as moot due to the judge's rescission of a prior award. The Board granted the defendant's petition, limiting the applicant's total temporary disability to 104 weeks per Labor Code section 4656(c)(2). The issue of a 15% permanent disability increase under Labor Code section 4658(d)(2) was deferred for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalFindings of FactOrder and AwardWCJPhlebotomistIndustrial InjuryCardiovascular SystemTemporary DisabilityPermanent Disability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 12, 1976

Esquire Division of L. Greif & Bros. v. Finley

The Supreme Court, New York County, on July 12, 1976, reversed a prior judgment that denied the petitioner's application to stay arbitration. The application to stay arbitration was subsequently granted. The court found no written requirement for arbitration between the parties in the record. Specifically, Local 4 Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Union was not a party to the collective bargaining agreement between the petitioner and the South Jersey Joint Board Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, nor was it mentioned therein. Furthermore, a stipulation dated August 15, 1975, did not provide for or require arbitration.

arbitrationcollective bargaininglabor lawstay arbitrationagreementunioncontract disputeNew York Supreme Courtreversal
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 13,682 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