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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ3512142 (MON 0288509)
Regular
Jan 12, 2009

JOSE LUIS LARA vs. BRATIFF HOME CORP. dba METRO DINER and SCOTT BROFFMAN as substantial shareholder; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFIT TRUST FUND

The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding that the applicant was an employee of Metro Diner on the date of injury, concluding that he was an independent contractor.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardBratiff Home Corp.Metro DinerScott BroffmanUninsured Employers Benefit Trust FundADJ3512142MON 0288509Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. SFO 0499272
Regular
Jul 07, 2008

Helen Miller vs. Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that Helen Miller was an employee of Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center and sustained an industrial injury to her left ankle. The Board found Miller was not a volunteer due to the extensive benefits received and the employer's control, and her jogging injury during a lunch break was a reasonable expectancy of employment, not barred by Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, her injury arose out of and occurred in the course of her employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardHelen MillerGreen Gulch Farm and Zen CenterEverest National InsuranceGallagher BassettSFO 0499272Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 3351Labor Code Section 3352(i)Employee definition
References
Case No. ADJ10021120 ADJ8949346
Regular
Apr 14, 2017

ANTHONY BERNARD EDWARDS (Dec'd), CANDACE EDWARDS (Widow), ASHLEY EDWARDS (Daughter), ANTHONY EDWARDS, JR. (Son) vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES; LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a workers' compensation death benefit claim for Anthony Bernard Edwards, who died in the course of his employment. The dependents seek death benefits and burial expenses, which were initially awarded by the WCJ. The employer, City of Los Angeles, sought reconsideration, arguing it should receive credit for a third-party settlement the dependents obtained from Kaiser Permanente. The Board agreed to reconsider the issue of credit, specifically whether Civil Code section 3333.1 bars such credit. The Board ultimately deferred the credit issue, affirming the death benefit award and returning the matter for further proceedings to determine the applicability of Civil Code section 3333.1 and potential employer negligence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ10021120ADJ8949346death benefitsLabor Code section 4702burial expensesCivil Code section 3333.1Medical Injury Compensation Reform ActMICRAthird-party settlement
References
Case No. ADJ8501790
Regular
Jul 29, 2015

Kelly Chase vs. St. Louis Blues Hockey Club, Federal Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reversed a prior finding of industrial injury for a professional hockey player against the St. Louis Blues. The WCAB found insufficient connection to California for jurisdiction, citing the player's limited games in the state compared to his overall career. This decision followed the precedent set in *Federal Insurance Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Johnson)*, which requires a legitimate and substantial connection to the state for jurisdiction. The WCAB concluded that 21 games out of 485 did not meet this standard for a cumulative injury claim.

WCABSt. Louis Blues Hockey ClubFederal Insurance CompanyADJ8501790Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationcumulative industrial injuryprofessional hockey playersubject matter jurisdictionstatute of limitationssubstantial medical evidence
References
Case No. ADJ4571860
Regular
Oct 16, 2008

FRANK REID vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

The Appeals Board reversed the trial judge's decision, finding the applicant's skin cancer was not an insidious, progressive disease and thus jurisdiction over permanent disability could not be reserved. They also disallowed apportionment of the applicant's 37 percent permanent disability, as he had no prior awards and was covered by a statutory exception for peace officer injuries. The Board established July 28, 2003, as the permanent and stationary date and corrected the date of injury to July 28, 2003.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFrank ReidCounty of San DiegoCriminal Investigator IVindustrial injuryskin cancerinsidious disease processpermanent and stationarypermanent disabilityapportionment
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. GOL 0088273
Regular
Aug 18, 2008

ROBERT SIEBURG vs. RONALD WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the case for further development of the record. The Board found the findings of the administrative law judge regarding $97\%$ permanent disability and apportionment were not supported by substantial medical evidence. Specifically, the opinion of Dr. Kahmann was deemed deficient due to internal inconsistencies, lack of explanation for apportionment, and undefined work restrictions. The Board also found Dr. Basham's report did not meet the standard for substantial medical evidence regarding cognitive dysfunction.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDROBERT SIEBURGRONALD WOLFE & ASSOCIATESSTATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUNDGOL 0088273OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONFindings and AwardWCJmaintenance person
References
Case No. OAK 0321116
Regular
Jun 25, 2008

RANDALL MINVIELLE vs. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA / CONTRA COSTA FIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded the prior award because the defendant failed to prove overlap between the applicant's 2004 and 1992 back injuries. Apportionment under Labor Code section 4664 was improper as the permanent disability from each injury was rated under different standards (1950 schedule vs. AMA Guides). The case was returned to the trial level to determine if both injuries could be rated under the same standard for proper apportionment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRandall MinvielleCounty of Contra CostaContra Costa Firelegally uninsuredOAK 0321116Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationindustrial injuryfirefighterback injury
References
Case No. ADJ11997989, ADJ2534190, ADJ3372314, ADJ470082, ADJ6672465
Regular
Mar 13, 2023

JAMES VESSELS vs. CRUZ MODULAR, INC., LABOR READY, ENSTAR US, ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was untimely, having been filed significantly past the jurisdictional deadline. The Board also noted this was a successive petition, which is impermissible when the prior petition was not successful and no new grievances have arisen. The Applicant's repeated, untimely filings have led the Board to consider declaring him a vexatious litigant under Rule 10430. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed in its entirety.

Petition for Reconsiderationuntimelysuccessive petitionjurisdictionalMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Rymer v. HaglerScott v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.U.S. Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.Goodrich v. Industrial Acc. Com.Ramsey v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
Showing 1-10 of 7,731 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