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. ADJ4639392 (SDO 0292761)
Regular
Aug 31, 2010

LISA FOWLER vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior finding that Automobile Club of Southern California discriminated against Lisa Fowler under Labor Code section 132a. The Board found Fowler failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination because her termination resulted from her failure to return to work after being released by her physician, in accordance with a uniformly applied company attendance policy. The employer's witness testified that work-related and non-work-related leaves were treated the same. Therefore, Fowler was not singled out for disadvantageous treatment compared to similarly situated employees.

Labor Code 132aDiscriminationReinstatementLost WagesWork BenefitsPrima Facie CaseAttendance PolicyUniformly AppliedTemporary DisabilityPermanent and Stationary
References
0
Case No. ADJ10149894
Regular
Mar 06, 2023

ANITA L. MCBRIDE vs. AUTO CLUB OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves Anita L. McBride's workers' compensation claim against Auto Club of Northern California and Old Republic Insurance Company for injuries including stroke, left eye damage, hypertension, and low back pain resulting from continuous trauma. The defendants petitioned for reconsideration, arguing the Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) failed to comply with Labor Code $\S 5313$ and erred in finding Dr. Paul Grodan's reports substantial evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the WCJ's report. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility determination, finding no substantial evidence to reject it, and denied attorney fees for the applicant's attorney.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationDenialWCJcredibility determinationGarzaattorney feesApplicantDefendantOffice Administrator
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 2012

China Auto Care, LLC v. China Auto Care (Caymans)

Plaintiffs China Auto Care, LLC and China Auto Care Holdings, LLC brought an action against China Auto Care (Caymans), Digisec Corporation, and the estate of Chander Oberoi, alleging various causes of action stemming from the 2011 sale of Digisec's assets. Defendants sought to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration, citing an arbitration clause in the parties' "Business Relationship and Shareholder Agreement." The court analyzed the scope of the arbitration clause under the Federal Arbitration Act. Finding the clause to be broad, the court concluded that the plaintiffs' claims were within its scope, as they "touch matters" governed by the Shareholder Agreement. Consequently, the court granted the defendants' motion, staying the litigation and compelling arbitration.

ArbitrationShareholder AgreementCorporate DisputeMotion to CompelFederal Arbitration ActSecond Circuit PrecedentFraudulent InducementCorporate GovernanceCayman Islands LawStay of Proceedings
References
25
Case No. ADJ2681583 (MON 0239411)
Regular
May 01, 2012

GUILLERMINA GONZALEZ vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JOBBERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE (CIGA) by BROADSPIRE, for CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE, in liquidation

In *Gonzalez v. Southern California Jobbers*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's decision. The Board rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision. This order signifies the matter is not yet finalized on its merits.

Reconsideration OrderRescindedFurther ProceedingsWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGABroadspireLiquidationSouthern California Jobbers
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Melvin West v. Southern County Mutual Insurance Company

Melvin West, an employee of Super Surface, Inc., was injured while driving a concrete truck. Super Surface, which did not subscribe to workers' compensation insurance, filed a claim under its business auto policy with Southern County Mutual Insurance Company. After Super Surface assigned its claim to West, he sued Southern County. Southern County moved for summary judgment, arguing the policy excluded employee bodily injury claims. West contended an exception for 'domestic employees not entitled to workers' compensation benefits' brought his claim under coverage, arguing 'domestic employee' was ambiguous. The court, agreeing with a prior Fort Worth Court of Appeals ruling and considering the Labor and Transportation Codes, found the phrase unambiguously referred to household employees not covered by workers' compensation, thus affirming the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Southern County.

Workers' CompensationBusiness Auto PolicyInsurance ExclusionSummary JudgmentPolicy InterpretationDomestic EmployeeAmbiguityTexas LawAppellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
11
Case No. ADJ6918185
Regular
Jan 07, 2017

LORRAINE ROBBINS vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, AAA AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration due to multiple procedural defects. Specifically, the petition was deemed skeletal, unverified, and lacked proof of service on adverse parties, all of which are required by Labor Code section 5902 and relevant Appeals Board Rules. The applicant was also provided notice of the lack of verification but failed to cure the defect. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and subsequent filings were rejected.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalSkeletal PetitionUnverified PetitionProof of ServiceLabor Code § 5902Appeals Board RulesWCJ ReportTimelinessVerification Defect
References
8
Case No. ADJ2200226
Regular
Apr 08, 2014

RUDY GALLARDO vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

The WCAB reversed a prior decision, finding it lacked jurisdiction over a hospital's lien claim for unpaid services. The Appeals Board held that an "express agreement," as required by Labor Code Section 5304 to divest the WCAB of jurisdiction, existed through a chain of contracts between the hospital, a network administrator (Blue Cross), and the self-insured employer. This chain of agreements fixed the payment amounts, thus precluding the WCAB from adjudicating the fee dispute. Any claims of contract breach or non-compliance with other statutes like Section 4609 must be pursued in a different forum.

WCAB jurisdictionLabor Code Section 5304express agreementchain of contractsHuntington HospitalSouthern California EdisonBlue Cross of CaliforniaOfficial Medical Fee Schedulelien claimfee dispute
References
4
Case No. ADJ2533587 (MON 0316136) ADJ3316360 (MON 0316137)
Regular

PATRICIA STELLY vs. AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involved a petition for reconsideration filed by Patricia Stelly. The Board reviewed the petition and the report from the workers' compensation administrative law judge. Ultimately, the Board denied Stelly's petition for reconsideration. The denial was based on the reasoning presented in the administrative law judge's report.

Patricia StellyAuto Club of Southern CaliforniaLiberty MutualADJ2533587ADJ3316360Petition for ReconsiderationDeniedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportAdopted
References
0
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. ADJ3851666 (AHM 0142294) ADJ6984864
Regular
Sep 03, 2010

EDWARD NEWMAN vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Edward Newman against Southern California Edison. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reviewed the petition and the accompanying report from the administrative law judge. Finding no grounds to disturb the WCJ's findings, the WCAB has issued an order denying removal. Therefore, the petition to remove the case from its current procedural stage has been rejected.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalWCJ reportdenying removalSouthern California EdisonPermissibly Self-InsuredADJ3851666ADJ6984864administrative law judgeRonnie G. Caplane
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 3,191 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