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. ADJ4519826 (AHM 0143791)
Regular
Oct 19, 2011

DEMAR MARTAY JENKINS vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, DALLAS COWBOYS, ARIZONA RATTLERS, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding California jurisdiction over the applicant's claim against the Arizona Rattlers. The Board found that the contract of hire was not made in California, as the applicant signed the agreement in Arizona and retained the ability to reject it. Therefore, California lacks jurisdiction over the claim against the Arizona Rattlers, and the applicant will take nothing from this defendant.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardContract of HireJurisdictionArizona RattlersSCF ArizonaAvizent AnaheimWCJLabor Code Section 5305Labor Code Section 3600.5(a)Laeng v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ4115739 (VNO 0487593)
Regular

ZACH WALZ vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS; RISK ENTERPRISE 2314 BREA

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, concerning applicant Zach Walz against defendants Arizona Cardinals and Risk Enterprise, resulted in an order granting a petition for reconsideration. All future case-related communications are to be directed to the Commissioners' Office in San Francisco, pending the issuance of a Decision After Reconsideration. The order was dated and filed on October 11, 2001.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationCommissioners' OfficeADJ4115739VNO 0487593VNO 0487351VNO 0487591VNO 0487592Arizona Cardinals
References
Case No. ADJ7233546
Regular
Apr 12, 2013

REGINALD SWINTON vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKLEY SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING MANAGERS, LLC, DALLAS COWBOYS, TRAVELERS, SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, PSI

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision affirms a prior administrative law judge's finding in the case of Reginald Swinton. The Board adopted the judge's report and recommendation without further elaboration. Therefore, the original May 31, 2012, Findings and Order remain in effect. The specific details of the claim against the Arizona Cardinals, Dallas Cowboys, and Seattle Seahawks were not detailed in this excerpt.

Reginald SwintonArizona CardinalsGreat Divide Insurance CompanyBerkley Specialty Underwriting ManagersDallas CowboysTravelersSeattle SeahawksPSIADJ7233546Anaheim District Office
References
Case No. ADJ8481999
Regular
Jan 21, 2020

Benjamin Claxton vs. Arizona Cardinals, Great Divide Insurance Company, administered by Berkley Specialty Underwriting Managers, Oakland Raiders, Ace American Insurance, administered by ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted reconsideration for Benjamin Claxton's case against the Arizona Cardinals and Oakland Raiders. This decision was made after an initial review of the record and is intended to allow for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB aims to issue a just and reasoned decision after this thorough examination. Pending the decision after reconsideration, all related communications must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners, not with any district office or through EAMS.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardArizona CardinalsGreat Divide Insurance CompanyBerkley Specialty Underwriting ManagersOakland RaidersAce American InsuranceESISOpinion and OrderGranting Petition
References
Case No. ADJ7460656
Significant
Jan 15, 2013

Dennis McKinley vs. Arizona Cardinals, The Travelers Indemnity Company

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, holding that it will decline to exercise jurisdiction over a cumulative injury claim when a reasonable mandatory forum selection clause in an employment contract specifies another state's forum, and the employee's connection to California is limited.

En banc decisionForum selection clauseCumulative injuryProfessional football playerArizona CardinalsLimited connection to CaliforniaEmployment contractIndustrial Commission of ArizonaPublic policyUnreasonable forum
References
Case No. ADJ7460656
En Banc
Jan 15, 2013

DENNIS MCKINLEY vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision, declining to exercise jurisdiction over a cumulative injury claim due to a reasonable mandatory forum selection clause in the employment contract specifying Arizona as the forum, coupled with the applicant's limited connection to California.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDEN BANCCUMULATIVE INJURYPROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL PLAYERARIZONA CARDINALSTRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANYFORUM SELECTION CLAUSEMANDATORY FORUMLIMITED CONNECTIONEMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
References
Case No. ADJ7337820
Regular
Apr 07, 2014

JOHN BOOTY vs. NEW YORK GIANTS, PMA GROUP, Arizona Cardinals, Fairmont Premier Insurance/Zenith Insurance Company

The applicant, a professional football player, claimed cumulative industrial injury against multiple NFL teams, including the New York Giants and the Arizona Cardinals. The applicant requested to dismiss the Arizona Cardinals with prejudice. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the dismissal to be "without prejudice." This preserves the New York Giants' potential right to seek contribution from the Cardinals should they be found liable for benefits. The Board affirmed the applicant's right to choose which defendants to litigate against.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationOrder Dismissing Party DefendantsCumulative InjuryProfessional Football PlayerNational Football LeagueJurisdictionLiabilityDate of InjuryCompromise & Release Agreement
References
Case No. ADJ8022872
Regular
Apr 08, 2015

THOMAS JOSEPH (JJ) McCLESKEY, JR. vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, NEW ORLEANS SAINTS, LOUISIANA WORKERS' COMPENSATION CORPORATION

The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's decision declining jurisdiction over the applicant's cumulative injury claim. The Board remanded the case for the WCJ to re-evaluate jurisdiction, considering the applicant's California contacts and potential hiring in California, despite forum selection clauses in his employment contracts. The reasonableness of enforcing these clauses, particularly concerning the employer's notification of workers' compensation rights and the allocation of liability for cumulative injuries under Labor Code section 5500.5, also needs further consideration. The WCJ must address all jurisdictional issues in a new decision at the trial level.

WCABcumulative injuryprofessional football playerforum selection clausejurisdictionrelation back doctrineLabor Code section 5500.5unreasonable enforcementnotification of rightsArizona Cardinals
References
Case No. ADJ6708293
Regular
Apr 04, 2013

Derrick Ransom vs. Jacksonville Jaguars, ACE Insurance, Arizona Cardinals, Travelers Indemnity Company, Gulf Insurance, Kansas City Chiefs, TIG Insurance, Risks Enterprise Management

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim filed by Derrick Ransom, a former professional football player. The Jacksonville Jaguars, through their insurer, petitioned for reconsideration of a finding that ordered them to pay for diagnostic testing and travel expenses before a jurisdictional determination. The Appeals Board found that ordering payment before establishing jurisdiction was improper. Therefore, the previous award was rescinded, and the matter was returned to the trial level to first determine if the Appeals Board has jurisdiction over the Jaguars.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationJurisdictionJacksonville JaguarsACE InsuranceArizona CardinalsTravelers Indemnity CompanyKansas City ChiefsTIG InsuranceQualified Medical Evaluator
References
Case No. ADJ10354615
Regular
Jun 10, 2019

MILFORD BROWN vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS, ST. LOUIS RAMS, CAROLINA PANTHERS, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, CARE OF BERKLEY SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING MANAGERS, JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, CARE OF QUAL-LYNX, INC., DETROIT LIONS, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a Petition for Removal in the case of Milford Brown. The Board found that removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The petitioner failed to demonstrate such harm or that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, the petition was denied, and the case will proceed through the standard workers' compensation process.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationExtraordinary RemedyAdverse DecisionArizona CardinalsSt. Louis Rams
References
Showing 1-10 of 40 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