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. ADJ7900836
Regular
Jul 24, 2012

JUAN MONROY CURIEL vs. NEENAH ENTERPRISES, WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANY

The defendant sought reconsideration of an order denying their petition to set aside a Compromise and Release agreement. The defendant argued the agreement contained a clerical error by not allocating funds for future medical care, thus violating Medicare Secondary Payer laws. The Board denied reconsideration, finding the defendant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause to set aside the agreement. The Board noted parties may file an addendum to allocate settlement proceeds for future Medicare-covered expenses due to bona fide disputes.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseOrder Approving Compromise and ReleaseSet Aside OrderClerical ErrorMedicare Secondary PayerFuture Medical CareAllocation of SettlementBona Fide Dispute
References
Case No. WCK 45264
En Banc
Aug 25, 2004

James L. Leinon vs. Fishermen's Grotto, Mid-Century Insurance Company

The Appeals Board held that a penalty under Labor Code section 4650(d) does not apply to disputed disability indemnity payments that are made within 14 days of a final order, decision, or award that imposes liability for those benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 4650(d)Temporary Disability Indemnity (TDI)PenaltyReconsiderationEn Banc DecisionInjury disputeDisability disputeIndemnity rate disputeFinal order
References
Case No. ADJ9346293
Significant
Apr 13, 2020

Anthony Dennis, Applicant vs. State of California – Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Inmate Claims, State Compensation Insurance Fund

The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board holds that Administrative Director Rule 10133.54 is invalid because it exceeds the AD's statutory authority and that an employer must make a bona fide offer of work to avoid liability for a supplemental job displacement benefit voucher.

AD Rule 10133.54Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitSJDB voucherexclusive jurisdictionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCABAdministrative Directorstatutory authoritybona fide offerregular work
References
Case No. ADJ9346293
Significant
Jan 13, 2020

ANTHONY DENNIS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA – DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION INMATE CLAIMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a Notice of Intention to find Administrative Director Rule 10133.54 invalid, asserting it oversteps the Administrative Director's authority and infringes upon the WCAB's exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes over supplemental job displacement benefits (SJDB). The Board also intends to hold that an employer must make a bona fide offer of work to avoid liability for an SJDB voucher.

Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitSJDB voucherAdministrative DirectorAD Rule 10133.54Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCABexclusive jurisdictionstatutory authoritybona fide offerregular work
References
Case No. ADJ9346293
En Banc
Jan 13, 2020

ANTHONY DENNIS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA – DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION INMATE CLAIMS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) issued a Notice of Intention to hold that Administrative Director (AD) Rule 10133.54 is invalid. The WCAB reasoned that the rule exceeds the AD's statutory authority and improperly restricts the WCAB's exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes over supplemental job displacement benefits (SJDB). The board also intends to affirm its prior decision that an employer must make a bona fide offer of work to an injured employee to be exempt from providing an SJDB voucher.

AD Rule 10133.54Supplemental Job Displacement BenefitBona Fide OfferExclusive JurisdictionAdministrative DirectorWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardInmate LaborerStatutory AuthorityEn Banc DecisionReconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ8024184
Regular
Jan 06, 2014

GUILLERMO ECHAVARRIA vs. BATHTUB KING, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision disallowing lien claims. The lien claimants failed to prove industrial causation by a preponderance of the evidence, as the primary medical opinion lacked substantial evidentiary support and was based on the applicant's contradictory statements. Furthermore, the lien claimants did not overcome the employer's post-termination defense under Labor Code section 3600(a)(10)(D). The Board also noted the failure to establish that reasonable and necessary medical treatment was provided.

Labor Code section 3600(a)(10)(D)Lien ClaimantsPetition for ReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseSerious DisputeBona Fide DisputeCausationPost-termination DefenseBurden of ProofPreponderance of the Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ15763825
Regular
Sep 16, 2025

CLAUDIO CARDOZO vs. ROCK AND ROLL CAR WASH, REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Redwood Fire and Casualty Insurance Company dba Berkshire Hathaway Homestate Companies. The petition challenged a lien trial decision concerning a medical-legal evaluation performed by Dr. Michaels of Premier Psychological Services. The WCJ found that a medical dispute regarding psyche existed at the time of the evaluation, Dr. Michaels was validly designated as the Primary Treating Physician, and the evaluation was not barred by the 60-day rule for new claims as it was an amendment to an already accepted claim. The Appeals Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning and denied the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5909Adjudication NumberOpinion and Order Denying PetitionWCJ ReportEAMS TransmissionNotice of TransmissionProof of ServiceFindings and Order
References
Case No. VNO 523244
Regular
Aug 04, 2008

ANGIE JAUREGUI vs. MERCY SOUTHWEST HOSPITAL

This case involves an employer seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for an injured nurse. The employer argued their modified work offer should have reduced the permanent disability award, but the Board denied reconsideration. The Board determined the employer's work offer was not a bona fide modified work offer, and thus did not qualify for the statutory reduction.

Permanent and stationaryMedical-legal reportWork restrictionsModified workAlternative workLabor Code Section 4658(d)Permanent disability awardPetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJ
References
Case No. ADJ17550375; ADJ17550386
Regular
Jul 29, 2025

JOHN RICHARD SEDANO vs. LIVE ACTION GENERAL ENGINEERING INC.; NATIONAL CASUALTY INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a 'Findings of Fact, Award & Order' (F&A) issued on March 24, 2025, by a WCJ, and issued a Notice of Intent to impose sanctions. The WCJ had found that the defendant did not provide a bona fide offer of modified duty to the applicant, John Richard Sedano, and awarded temporary disability. Defendant argued that temporary disability should not have been awarded because an offer of work was made, the award lacked substantial medical evidence, and the WCJ failed to apply apportionment under Labor Code sections 4663 and 4664. The WCAB affirmed the March 24, 2025 F&A and imposed sanctions of $750.00$ jointly and severally against the employer, insurer, administrator, and their attorneys for errors in the petition for reconsideration, including failure to cite the evidentiary record, improperly attaching documents, raising new issues, and citing non-existent legal authority. The Board also found the defendant was equitably estopped from asserting the modified work offer as a bar to temporary disability, and that the modified work offer was independently invalid due to a conflict in medical restrictions.

Temporary DisabilityModified DutyBona Fide OfferApportionmentLabor Code Sections 4663Labor Code Sections 4664SanctionsEquitable EstoppelMaximum Medical ImprovementWork Restrictions
References
Case No. ADJ11364300
Regular
May 24, 2019

JOHN MANNING vs. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY

This case involves a dispute over an applicant's entitlement to an Independent Medical Examiner (IME) under an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) agreement governing workers' compensation claims. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration, finding the original order was not a final decision. However, the WCAB granted the petition for removal, rescinded the administrative law judge's finding that no IME was warranted, and returned the case for further proceedings. The WCAB determined it was unclear whether it had jurisdiction to rule on the medical-legal discovery dispute, as parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation, and ordered the trial judge to determine if the ADR program or the WCAB has jurisdiction.

ADR agreementCalifornia Labor Code §3201.7Independent Medical Examiner (IME)removalreconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)specific injurycumulative traumafire captainskin cancer
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,250 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