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. ADJ7583495
Regular
Oct 21, 2011

PEDRO GANDARA vs. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

This case concerns a Petition for Reconsideration filed by the defendant, City of Bakersfield, following a decision dated August 9, 2011. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition due to statutory time constraints and the need for further review of complex factual and legal issues. This action allows the Board to thoroughly study the record to ensure a just and reasoned decision. All future filings should be directed to the Board's Office of the Commissioners.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCity of BakersfieldPermissibly Self-InsuredDecision After ReconsiderationStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesJust and reasoned decisionOffice of the CommissionersSan Francisco
References
0
Case No. ADJ7904815
Regular
Apr 10, 2014

TED MARTINEZ vs. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

This case concerns Ted Martinez's workers' compensation claim against the City of Bakersfield for industrial psychiatric and Valley Fever injuries. The Board granted reconsideration to review the $41\%$ permanent disability award, which the defendant argued was based on an Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) opinion that failed to comply with *Almaraz/Guzman II* guidelines. The Board found the AME's opinion lacked sufficient explanation for deviating from the AMA Guides and thus was not substantial evidence. Consequently, the Board affirmed the initial findings of injury but deferred permanent disability and attorney fees for further development of the record at the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryValley FeverCoccidioidomycosisContinuous traumaPermanent disability ratingAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Whole Person Impairment (WPI)Almaraz/Guzman IIAMA Guides
References
5
Case No. ADJ11121014
Regular
Nov 02, 2019

DIANA BAKER vs. BAKERSFIELD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Diana Baker's petition for reconsideration against Bakersfield City School District. The dismissal was based on the petition being untimely filed. California law requires petitions for reconsideration to be filed within 25 days of the served decision. In this case, Baker's petition was filed significantly beyond this jurisdictional deadline, rendering the WCAB without authority to review it.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely filingJurisdictional time limitWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative law judgeWCJ decisionProof of mailing insufficientDismissal orderCase ADJ11121014Bakersfield City School District
References
4
Case No. ADJ8682322
Regular
Jun 26, 2013

MARILYN VIELMA vs. BAKERSFIELD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, DIGNITY HEALTH c/o SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant hospital's petition for removal, reversing an earlier denial of their venue change request. The defendant argued their objection to the Marina Del Rey venue was timely filed within 30 days of receiving the adjudication case number and venue notice. The Board found the objection was indeed filed on the 30th day after the defendant's claims administrator received notice. Consequently, venue was changed to the Bakersfield district office, as required by statute when an objection is timely.

Petition for RemovalPetition for Change of Venueuntimelythirtieth dayNotice of ApplicationvenueCNA techindustrial injuryApplication for Adjudication of ClaimLabor Code section 5501.5
References
0
Case No. ADJ6602419
Regular
May 24, 2010

SIPRIANO MARTINEZ (Deceased) MARINA MARTINEZ (Widow) vs. BOLTHOUSE FARMS, ALL AMERICAN RISK LOSS ADMINISTRATORS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an order denying a change of venue because the order was procedural, not final. However, the WCAB granted the defendant's petition for removal, finding that the denial of venue change to Bakersfield was an error. The Board concluded that the defendant sufficiently demonstrated good cause under Labor Code section 5501.6 for a venue change to Bakersfield, where the applicant and witnesses reside and the events occurred. Therefore, venue was changed to the Bakersfield District Office.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalOrder Denying Change of VenueLabor Code section 5501.6(b)Due ProcessBakersfield District OfficeSan Francisco District OfficeFinal OrderProcedural OrderPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator
References
4
Case No. RDG 0119112, RDG 0119113
Regular
Aug 04, 2008

CHARLES D. PINEDA vs. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY BAKERSFIELD, SEDGWICK CLAIMS SERVICES, BAKERSFIELD HEALTH DEPARTMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed against a non-final procedural order denying a stay and continuance. The Board also denied the applicant's Petition for Removal, finding no extraordinary circumstances or showing of significant prejudice. The case will return to the trial level to proceed with the scheduled trial.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeMinute OrderTrial DateStay of ProceedingsChange of VenueConflicts of InterestVexatious LitigantInterlocutory Order
References
5
Case No. ADJ7912638
Regular
Apr 17, 2013

MARIA CASTREJON vs. BOLTHOUSE FARMS INC., BROADSPIRE

This case involves a petition for removal by the defendant, Bolthouse Farms, seeking to change the venue from Marina del Rey to Bakersfield. The defendant argued inconvenience for the applicant and witnesses residing in Kern County. Although the initial judge denied the venue change due to insufficient witness detail, the Appeals Board granted the petition for removal. The Board ultimately changed the venue to Bakersfield, considering the applicant's lack of opposition and the overall balance of equities.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code Section 5501.5(a)(3)Kern CountyBolthouse FarmsMarina del ReyBakersfieldIndustrial InjuryReduction in Workforce
References
0
Case No. ADJ10489602
Regular
Apr 19, 2017

DAVID NENAHLO vs. BOLTHOUSE FARMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's Petition for Removal, overturning a prior decision that denied a change of venue. The WCAB found venue was improperly established in Sacramento solely based on the applicant's attorney's business location. Because the applicant resides out-of-state and the injury occurred in Bakersfield, venue must be transferred to the Bakersfield District Office per Labor Code section 5501.5(c). This ruling corrects the administrative law judge's error in denying the venue change request.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueLabor Code section 5501.5(c)Principal Place of BusinessBakersfield District OfficeSacramento District OfficeWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeApplicant's AttorneyEmployer Objection
References
2
Case No. ADJ8001991
Regular
Apr 17, 2013

FELIX SANCHEZ vs. BOLTHOUSE FARMS INC.; AMERICAN ALL RISK LOSS, BROADSPIRE

This case involves a defendant's petition to change venue for a workers' compensation claim from Marina del Rey to Bakersfield. The defendant argued that the applicant and key witnesses reside in Kern County, making the original venue inconvenient. Although the initial petition was denied due to insufficient witness information, the Appeals Board granted removal. This was primarily based on the applicant's lack of objection to the venue change, thereby tipping the balance of equities in favor of granting the defendant's request. Consequently, the venue for the case has been officially transferred to the Bakersfield district office.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPrincipal Place of BusinessKern CountyLos Angeles BasinIndustrial InjuryApplication for Adjudication of ClaimLabor Code Section 5501.5(a)(3)Report and Recommendation
References
0
Case No. ADJ7583495, ADJ7084199, ADJ7084203
Regular
Nov 07, 2011

PEDRO GANDARA vs. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) decision that the applicant's claim for a specific injury on June 15, 2004, was not barred by the statute of limitations. The applicant filed his claim shortly after obtaining medical reports attributing a portion of his disability to this specific incident, which occurred as a witnessed event. The defendant's argument that notice was not required due to lack of lost time or initial medical treatment was rejected. The WCAB found that the claim conformed to proof and adopted the WCJ's reasoning.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPEDRO GANDARACITY OF BAKERSFIELDADJ7583495ADJ7084199ADJ7084203OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings of Fact and Joint Awardsolid waste equipment operatorright wrist and shoulder
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 32 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