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. ADJ1508875
Regular
Sep 16, 2019

DERRELL FELDMAN vs. CRITCHFIELD MECHANICAL, ENSTAR U.S., INC., O.C. MCDONALD, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CT, PARAGON MECHANICAL, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involved applicant Derrell Feldman and multiple defendants. The Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision. The amended decision affirmed the original ruling but increased the applicant's attorney fees to $10,432.80. Additionally, the award for permanent disability indemnity was adjusted, and the attorney fees were ordered payable directly to the applicant's counsel.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationWCJ's reportSeabright Insurance CompanyPermanent disability indemnityLabor Code Section 4658(d)Attorney feesADJ1508875Critchfield Mechanical
References
Case No. ADJ1508875 (SAL 0120616) ADJ10261915 ADJ7549983
Regular
Oct 31, 2019

DERREL FELDMAN vs. CRITCHFIELD MECHANICAL, ENSTAR U.S., INC., d.b.a ENSTAR ADMINISTRATORS, SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY, O.C. MCDONALD, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY of CT, PARAGON MECHANICAL, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involved a clerical error in a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision that inadvertently awarded a second Labor Code section 4658(d) increase. The defendant requested a correction, which the WCAB granted. The WCAB has the authority to correct clerical errors at any time. Therefore, the September 16, 2019 decision was affirmed but amended to remove the erroneous second increase, clarifying the permanent disability indemnity awarded.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationClerical ErrorLabor Code section 4658(d)Permanent disability indemnityAttorney feesSeabright Insurance CompanyTravelers Indemnity CompanyState Compensation Insurance FundCritchfield Mechanical
References
Case No. ADJ10173387; ADJ19907358; ADJ3052978; ADJ3882676; ADJ4063239; ADJ4429907; ADJ883851; ADJ8926536
Regular
Sep 22, 2025

AURORA MUNOZ vs. FIRST GROUP AMERICA, NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an applicant's petition for reconsideration of a denial of increased benefits for serious and willful misconduct by her employer. The applicant, a bus driver, was injured when a passenger lift malfunctioned. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that the employer did not engage in serious and willful misconduct, as they reasonably relied on a mechanic's report stating the vehicle was safe to operate after an electrical short. The Board also found no basis for a presumption of serious and willful misconduct due to the employer's alleged failure to respond to discovery requests, as such procedures are not typically applicable in workers' compensation proceedings.

Serious and Willful MisconductLabor Code Section 4553Vehicle Inspection ReportPassenger LiftMechanic's Opinion"OK to Drive"Knowledge of DangerIntentional ActReckless DisregardAdverse Inference
References
Case No. ADJ10620323
Regular
May 14, 2019

EDWARD ZOZOSKY vs. INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTOR CO.; XL INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a finding that Edward Zozosky sustained a right shoulder injury arising out of and in the course of employment, despite conflicting evidence regarding a forceful braking event. The Board found that medical reports from Dr. Kupfer and Dr. Zardouz constituted substantial evidence supporting the injury AOE/COE. While the defendant presented testimony and evidence questioning the mechanics of the alleged forceful stop, the Board gave deference to the administrative law judge's credibility determination of the applicant. However, one Commissioner dissented, arguing that the applicant failed to present substantial evidence of an industrial injury, emphasizing the lack of corroborating medical history and applicant's credibility issues.

AOE/COEhard braking eventOnGuard systemABS brakesrotator cuff capsule sprainindustrial aggravationQMEmedical opinioncredibility determinationsubstantial evidence
References
Case No. ADJ3328242 (SAC 0369772)
Regular
Mar 07, 2009

FRANK R. SANTOS vs. AMERICAN AIR MECHANICAL, INC., FIRST COMP OMAHA for ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant, Frank R. Santos, and defendants American Air Mechanical, Inc. and First Comp Omaha. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has issued an order denying reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge and gave great weight to their credibility determination. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration has been denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgeCredibility FindingGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Denial of ReconsiderationAmerican Air MechanicalFirst Comp OmahaEndurance Insurance CompanyADJ3328242
References
Case No. ADJ705744 (AHM 0148879)
Regular
Feb 05, 2013

PATRICK MURRAY vs. BALTAZAR PEREZ, DBA PERFORMANCE AIR AND MECHANICAL, UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND, CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Patrick Murray's petition for reconsideration, upholding the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCJ's report, which was adopted by the Board, determined that Murray was not an employee of California Auto Collision on the date of his injury. The Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund's (UEBTF) petition for reconsideration was dismissed as skeletal and would have been denied on its merits as well. The Board found that the evidence supported the conclusion that Murray was an employee of Baltazar Perez, DBA Performance Air and Mechanical, and not California Auto Collision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundSkeletal PetitionWCAB Rule 10846Employee StatusIndependent ContractorControl TestSecondary IndiciaBorello Factors
References
Case No. ADJ1468790 (RIV 0078105)
Regular
Feb 21, 2014

AUSTREBERTO FLORES, EFIGENIA FLORES vs. CARSON CAPITAL CORPORATION, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that applicants failed to prove a serious and willful violation or safety violation causing the decedent's death. The WCJ found the employer had no knowledge of the cart's mechanical issues, deeming the throttle spring break a spontaneous event. The Board upheld this, giving more weight to the credible testimony of the employer and defense witness over unsworn hearsay statements from co-employees not produced for cross-examination. A dissenting commissioner argued for further development of the record, noting consistent employee statements suggesting employer knowledge of mechanical problems and failure to act.

Serious and willful violationSafety violationDeath benefitsCompromise and ReleasePetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompetent hearsayDeposeCross-examinationCredibility findings
References
Case No. ADJ7166686
Regular
Jul 24, 2012

RICHARD ANDERSON vs. JAGUAR/LANDROVER OF VENTURA, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant who suffered a stroke and subsequent 100% permanent disability following surgery for an industrial shoulder injury. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing for apportionment to pre-existing conditions and challenging the attorney's fee calculation. The Appeals Board affirmed the 100% permanent disability finding, finding no basis for apportionment as the applicant's pre-existing conditions did not cause the disability itself. However, the Board modified the attorney's fee award, requiring commutation using a specific method and a 3% cost of living adjustment, finding the previously assumed 4.6% to be speculative.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardRichard AndersonJaguar/Landrover of VenturaCompwest Insurance CompanyADJ7166686ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryBrain InjuryNeurological System
References
Case No. SRO 137805
Regular
Jun 03, 2008

MARK GATTONI vs. HANSEL FORD LINCOLN-MERCURY, AUTO DEALERS COMPENSATION OF CALIFORNIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the date of injury for Mark Gattoni's cumulative shoulder trauma claim. The Board corrected the period of injurious exposure to May 31, 2004, to May 31, 2005, aligning liability with the employer during the applicant's final year of work. While affirming the WCJ's findings on injury, disability, permanent impairment, and medical treatment, the Board established August 2, 2006, as the legal date of injury under Labor Code section 5412, confirming the claim was not time-barred.

Cumulative traumaStatute of limitationDate of injuryOccupational diseaseTemporary total disabilityApportionmentFurther medical treatmentAutomobile mechanicRight major shoulderEmployer liability
References
Case No. ADJ7642434
Regular
Nov 05, 2012

Matthew Austin vs. Bridgestone/Firestone, Old Republic Insurance

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's petition for reconsideration regarding a psyche injury claim. The Board found the applicant's slip and fall on a broken stair was not a "sudden and extraordinary employment condition" as required by Labor Code section 3208.3(d) for claims filed within six months of employment. Therefore, the applicant's psyche injury claim does not meet this exception. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Labor Code section 3208.3(d)psyche injurysudden and extraordinary eventpetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJautomobile mechanicslip and fallbroken stepoccupational hazard
References
Showing 1-10 of 209 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