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. 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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lynch v. United States Automobile Ass'n

Plaintiff William Lynch initiated an action against the United States Automobile Association (USAA) for unpaid overtime wages, citing violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. Lynch sought to amend his complaint to include other similarly situated employees who had opted into the collective action and to introduce California state-law claims for nine California-based plaintiffs. USAA opposed the amendment, primarily arguing that the court should decline supplemental jurisdiction over the California claims due to their purported novelty, complexity, potential to predominate over federal claims, or risk of jury confusion. Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox evaluated USAA's objections under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) and determined that the California state-law claims were not novel or complex, would not substantially predominate, and that jury confusion did not constitute an exceptional circumstance compelling a denial of jurisdiction. Consequently, the court granted Lynch's motion for leave to amend the complaint.

FLSAOvertime WagesFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawCalifornia Labor LawRule 15(a)Supplemental JurisdictionMotion to Amend ComplaintCollective ActionClass Certification
References
11
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. 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. ADJ11045527
Regular
Sep 23, 2019

KIMBERLY FREEMAN vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to challenge an interlocutory decision by the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) regarding the applicant's communication with a qualified medical evaluator (QME) and the denial of a replacement QME panel. The WCAB found this issue was not a final order, making reconsideration an inappropriate procedural avenue. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of significant prejudice or irreparable harm, which the defendant failed to establish. Therefore, the petition was denied as improperly seeking reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalFindings and OrderWCJ ReportFinal OrderInterlocutory DecisionThreshold IssueEmployment RelationshipQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)
References
8
Case No. ADJ9876000
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

DEWAIN REYNA vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the judge's finding that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proving industrial injury by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility determination of the applicant, finding no substantial evidence to warrant rejection. Furthermore, the Board ruled that the applicant waived the presumption of compensability under Labor Code §5402 by failing to raise it at trial. Finally, the Board admonished applicant's counsel for improperly attaching documents to the petition, violating Board rules.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ credibility determinationburden of proofpreponderance of the evidencewaiver of issueLabor Code §5402Appeals Board Rule 10842(c)AOE/COEindustrial injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ9137596
Regular
Sep 13, 2018

AMANDA GOMEZ vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE HARTFORD

The Board granted reconsideration to amend the temporary disability dates in the original Findings and Award, but otherwise affirmed the decision. The Board denied the defendant's petition for disqualification of the WCJ as untimely and unsupported by factual allegations. The Board found the applicant's testimony and Dr. Anderson's medical reports constituted substantial evidence of industrial injury and causation. The defendant was admonished for disrespectful language used in its petition.

AOECOEWCJ credibility determinationsubstantial evidenceprimary treating physicianPQMEdisqualification petitiontimely filingjudicial biasundisputed factscredible testimony
References
15
Case No. ADJ1944746
Regular
Feb 02, 2009

JERRY W. FRANKLIN vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, TRAVELERS

This case involves an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits due to injuries sustained while employed as an office clerk. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration to correct a clerical error that omitted a finding on earnings. The defendant's petition for reconsideration, which alleged insufficient evidence for industrial injury and procedural error by the judge, was denied. The WCAB affirmed the Amended Findings and Award, amending it to include the applicant's weekly earnings.

ApportionmentLabor Code section 4663SB 899CausationPermanent disabilityIndustrial injurySurveillance videoOpinion on DecisionAmended Findings and AwardPetition for Reconsideration
References
6
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
Showing 1-10 of 3,425 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