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. VNO 0438915
Regular
Oct 23, 2008

Applicant vs. University of Southern California

This case concerns an applicant's Petition for Reconsideration of a WCAB decision denying injury claims against the University of Southern California (USC). The applicant alleged a physical altercation with his supervisor, Mr. Pickering, during a meeting on September 20, 2001, which he claims caused various injuries. However, the WCJ found the applicant lacked credibility due to inconsistencies in his testimony and failure to report the incident promptly. The WCJ relied on testimony from witnesses who stated Mr. Pickering merely touched the applicant's shoulders and noted the applicant's history of prior injuries and medical issues not fully disclosed.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiological Safety Specialistspecific injuryanimositycredibility issuesshoulder touchingprior injurieshypertension
References
0
Case No. ADJ7155290, ADJ7250226
Regular
Oct 11, 2018

Applicant vs. JOHN F. KENNEDY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, SEDGWICK CMS

The WCAB affirmed the WCJ's decisions denying applicant's workers' compensation claims. In one case, the WCJ found the applicant's claim barred by collateral estoppel due to an arbitration decision, and the WCAB agreed the applicant had an adequate opportunity to litigate. In the second case, the WCAB upheld the WCJ's finding that the applicant failed to prove injury AOE/COE, rejecting claims of post-traumatic memory issues and insufficient rebuttal evidence. The WCAB gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination based on observing witnesses.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and OrdersPresumption of CompensabilityLabor Code Section 5402AOE/COECollateral EstoppelArbitrationPost-traumatic Memory IssuesDr. Bassett
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Jones

Corey Jones, indicted for murder of a government witness, previously had his application for bail denied. He renewed his application based on new evidence regarding his co-defendant and brother, Jason Jones. This evidence, including work and travel records, strongly contradicted the government's unidentified eye-witness testimony, which initially implicated both brothers. The Court noted that the eye-witness's identification of Jason Jones was proven inaccurate, which materially affected the credibility of the same witness's identification of Corey Jones, especially since the witness knew both brothers by name. After reviewing all evidence, including testimony from alibi witnesses and a secondary victim, the Court found that the weight of the evidence now overcomes the presumption of detention. Consequently, Corey Jones's renewed application for bail was granted, contingent on suitable conditions.

BailPretrial DetentionWitness CredibilityAlibiNew EvidenceMurder ChargeSouthern District of New YorkCriminal ProcedureFederal CourtRelease Conditions
References
2
Case No. ADJ7785733, ADJ7632939
Regular
Oct 01, 2012

JOHN SHEK vs. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTER OF OAKLAND, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE

This case involves applicant's petitions for reconsideration and removal concerning administrative orders that sustained objections to witness subpoenas and excused a witness's appearance. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the reconsideration petitions as intermediate orders are not subject to such review. They also denied the removal petition, finding no showing of significant prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board upheld the WCJ's decision to exclude undisclosed witnesses and excuse the excused witness based on the applicant's failure to comply with discovery and witness disclosure rules.

Pro sePetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCAB RulesSubpoena Duces TecumQuash SubpoenaExcuse Witness AppearanceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureNewly Discovered Evidence
References
2
Case No. ADJ1054155 (LAO 0854446) ADJ1247741 (LAO 0854447) ADJ1895803 (LAO 0854448)
Regular
May 03, 2011

HIRITI OKUAMICHAEL vs. PAUL OWENS SHOES INC., STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This amended order clarifies that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of the February 8, 2011 Findings and Awards. This reconsideration aims to allow the Board to thoroughly study the factual and legal issues, including those to be raised in the applicant's supplemental petition. The applicant's request to file a supplemental petition has also been granted and reaffirmed. All future communications regarding these cases should be directed to the Office of the Commissioners of the WCAB.

Supplemental PetitionReconsiderationAppeals Board Rule 10848Findings and AwardsDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersWCABADJ1054155ADJ1247741ADJ1895803
References
0
Case No. STK 0190139
Regular
Nov 07, 2007

ANTO'NIO ACOSTA vs. LUPTON EXCAVATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that the applicant failed to prove his injury arose out of and in the course of employment. This decision was based on the judge's determination that the applicant was not a credible witness and presented inconsistent accounts of the incident. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility findings and the inconsistencies in the applicant's medical history and witness testimony.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeReport and RecommendationLabor Code § 3202.5Preponderance of the EvidenceInjury Arising Out of and In The Course of EmploymentCredibilityInconsistent HistoriesContemporaneous Medical Reports
References
1
Case No. ADJ9166524
Regular
Feb 24, 2015

MICHAEL GORBEA vs. LIMBACH COMPANY, LP, ARCH INSURANCE, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board adopted and incorporated the WCJ's report, giving great weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations due to observing the witnesses' demeanor. The WCJ found the applicant's testimony regarding the alleged injury was not credible and was rebutted by defense witnesses. Furthermore, the WCJ determined the post-termination defense was applicable as the applicant's notice of injury was not timely or contemporaneous with his layoff.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationpost-termination defenseDover v. Fresh Start Bakeriescontemporaneous notification exceptionpreponderance of the evidenceindustrial clinic diagnosislumbar sprainmuscle spasm
References
3
Case No. ADJ8944771
Regular
Apr 14, 2015

OSCAR CARBALLO vs. THE WATERFRONT HOTEL, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration. The Board affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) finding that the applicant failed to prove their injury arose out of and occurred in the course of employment (AOE/COE). The WCJ found the applicant's testimony less credible than the defense witnesses, who testified the applicant claimed injury at home. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determinations, as the judge had the opportunity to observe the witnesses.

Petition for ReconsiderationWCABInjury AOE/COECredibility DeterminationsWitness DemeanorIndustrial CausationLabor Code 4600(a)(10)Pre-termination TreatmentDefense WitnessesApplicant Testimony
References
3
Case No. ADJ9016733
Regular
May 03, 2016

TYSON CONGER vs. CARE AMBULANCE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a prior award concerning industrial injuries to his low back and psyche. The applicant argues the original findings did not properly weigh evidence and support a higher permanent disability rating. The Board also permitted the applicant to file a supplemental petition to address new information, allowing defendants an opportunity to respond. Reconsideration was granted to ensure a complete review of the record and a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSupplemental PetitionEmergency Medical TechnicianLow Back InjuryPsyche InjuryTemporary DisabilityFuture Medical TreatmentPermanent DisabilityApportionment
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 02, 1990

Kathleen G. v. St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services

The petitioner appealed an order from the Surrogate’s Court of St. Lawrence County which dismissed her application to vacate the surrender of her infant daughter, Elizabeth, for adoption to the respondent. Elizabeth had previously been in foster care and returned to the petitioner. The petitioner subsequently signed a surrender document in December 1988, allegedly after discussions with her caseworker and an adoption worker, and after it was read and explained to her by the adoption worker and acknowledged by the Surrogate. Petitioner later sought to vacate the surrender, alleging she was misled and coerced, particularly concerning visitation rights. The Surrogate's Court dismissed her petition, finding her testimony unbelievable and crediting the respondent's witnesses who testified that the surrender was fully discussed, voluntary, and without conditions on visitation. The appellate court affirmed the decision, deferring to the Surrogate's Court's factual findings regarding witness credibility and the voluntary nature of the surrender. Additionally, the court declined to review the constitutional question raised by the petitioner, as it was not litigated in the Surrogate's Court and the Attorney-General was not provided with notice.

AdoptionChild SurrenderVacate OrderParental RightsCoercionFraudVisitation RightsSurrogate's CourtAppellate ReviewWitness Credibility
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 13,498 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