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. ADJ7017513
Regular
May 14, 2014

ARTURO JACOBO vs. DUCOMMUN AERO STRUCTURES, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

In case ADJ7017513, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Arturo Jacobo's Petition for Reconsideration. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning of the administrative law judge's report. The Board considered the applicant's response to the report before issuing its denial. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was officially denied by the WCAB.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law Judge ReportCal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 10848WCAB Rules of Practice and ProcedureDenying PetitionDucommun Aero StructuresTravelers Insurance CompanyArturo JacoboADJ7017513
References
Case No. ADJ7481094
Regular
Nov 19, 2012

ARTURO MARTINEZ vs. DISNEYLAND RESORT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration in the case of *Martinez v. Disneyland Resort* following a petition by lien claimant Safety Works Medical, Inc. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB aims to fully understand the record to issue a just decision. All future communications regarding this case must now be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not to any district office or e-filed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationLien ClaimantStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After ReconsiderationCommissionersElectronic Adjudication Management SystemDisneyland ResortSafety Works Medical
References
Case No. ADJ8642799
Regular
Nov 01, 2018

ARTURO LEDESMA vs. BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

The Appeals Board denied defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order finding applicant temporarily totally disabled. The Board affirmed that the Employment Development Department (EDD) is entitled to recover its lien for disability benefits paid during the period of temporary total disability. Temporary disability is not subject to apportionment, though liability for such benefits between carriers on successive injuries can be addressed through contribution proceedings. The Board found substantial evidence supported the temporary disability finding, including EDD records and QME Sofia's reports noting applicant was off work.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardArturo LedesmaBarrett Business ServicesInc.Corvel CorporationADJ8645906Employment Development DepartmentEDD lienQualified Medical ExaminerPeter J. Sofia
References
Case No. ADJ2258100 (LAO 0864241)
Regular
Jul 03, 2013

ARTURO VILCHES vs. STEVE KNAPP RACING STABLES, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES/CHARTIS INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB will use this reconsideration to ensure a complete understanding of the record and issue a just decision. Pending this, all future filings must be submitted in writing directly to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not to district offices or via e-filing.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationArturo VilchesSteve Knapp Racing StablesAIG Claims ServicesChartis InsuranceStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual IssuesLegal Issues
References
Case No. ADJ7191867
Regular
Mar 23, 2012

ARTURO ESCOBAR vs. HENRY WINE GROUP dba ZEPHYR EXPRESS, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior decision because the WCJ's imposition of a 20% penalty for delayed payment did not adequately explain the penalty amount based on established legal factors. While a delay in payment was found, the Board remanded the case for the WCJ to re-evaluate penalties and interest by clearly applying factors from relevant case law and justifying the awarded amounts with specific evidence. The original decision also failed to separately address statutory interest owed on the delayed payment. The Board emphasized the need for decisions to articulate the evidentiary basis and reasoning for penalty assessments.

Labor Code section 5814Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJZurich American Insurance CompanyArturo EscobarHenry Wine GroupZephyr ExpressCompromise & Releasepenalty
References
Case No. ADJ10902181
Regular
Aug 29, 2018

ARTURO GUARDADO BARAJAS vs. VALMONT INDUSTRIES, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding that Arturo Guardado Barajas' claim for a right shoulder injury on June 27, 2016, was not barred by the post-termination defense. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) who gave great weight to the applicant's credible testimony. The WCJ found that the employer had sufficient notice of the injury prior to termination, based on the applicant's phone message to his supervisor and his statement to HR. The defense's failure to produce phone records to rebut the applicant's testimony further supported this finding.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code § 3600(a)(10)post-termination defenseAOE/COEcredibility determinationsGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.Agreed Medical Evaluatornotice of injuryBraewood Convalescent Hospital v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Case No. ADJ8667258
Regular
Jul 15, 2015

ARTURO ORTIZ (Deceased), JUANA FUENTES, IRENNE ORTIZ vs. SONORA AUTO SALES, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a previous ruling, finding Arturo Ortiz was an employee of Sonora Auto Sales at the time of his death. The Board found that the defendant failed to overcome the presumption of employee status. Factors such as the nature of the work, Ortiz's consistent presence, and Sonora's right to control tipped the scales in favor of employment. Issues of whether the injury arose out of and in the course of employment were deferred.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndependent Contractor vs. EmployeePresumption of EmploymentControl TestBorello FactorsEmployer's Burden of ProofAuto Repair MechanicUsed Automobile DealershipReconditioning VehiclesWorkers' Compensation Act
References
Case No. ADJ10233708
Regular
Jan 17, 2020

ARTURO CHAVEZ vs. PURPOSE DRIVEN PERSONNEL, HARTFORD, COUNTRYWIDE PAYROLL, NORTH BAY DISTRIBUTION, COMPWEST, H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, TRAVELERS

This case concerns the employment status of applicant Arturo Chavez and the resulting workers' compensation liability. The WCAB rescinded the prior findings of fact regarding employment and remanded the case for further proceedings. The primary dispute revolves around whether Purpose Driven Personnel was applicant's employer, given its reliance on Countrywide for payroll and workers' compensation insurance. The Board emphasized the need for further development of evidence, particularly regarding employment agreements between potential employers, to clarify the employer-employee relationship and subsequent insurance coverage.

Special employerGeneral employerDual employmentJoint and several liabilityLabor Code section 3602(d)PEOEmployee leasingService agreementWorkers' compensation insuranceFindings of Fact
References
Case No. ADJ7627116
Regular
Nov 03, 2015

Arturo Gallegos vs. Barrett Business Services

The Appeals Board dismissed MH Express Pharmacy's Petition for Reconsideration as untimely filed. However, it granted reconsideration for other lien claimants, rescinded the dismissal of their liens, and returned the matter to the WCJ for a hearing on the merits. This decision was based on the fact that the liens predated the relevant statutory changes and the claimants eventually provided the required supporting documentation. The Board noted that the WCJ should consider sanctions for the delayed compliance.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissal of LienLabor Code Section 4903.8(e)Labor Code Section 4903.5(d)Labor Code Section 4903.8(d)untimely petitionsubstantial justicedisposition on meritsrescinded order
References
Case No. ADJ7597718 ADJ7597723
Regular
Aug 09, 2017

ARTURO BERNAL vs. RIVIERA RESORT AND SPA, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration. Although the Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) initially stated the petition was untimely, the Board found it was timely filed. This was because the defendant had not been properly served with the original or amended Findings, Award and Order. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning in its denial.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ reportservice of ordersLabor Code section 5903timely filedFindings Award and OrderAmended Findings and AwardBroadspireMehr and Associates
References
Showing 1-10 of 39 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