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. LAO 863258
Regular
Oct 02, 2007

JULIE A. ALBRIGHT vs. SUN HEALTH CARE, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BROADSPIRE

This case involves Julie Albright's workers' compensation claim against Sun Health Care and its administrator, Broadspire. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Broadspire's petition for reconsideration regarding their liability as administrator for Albright's cumulative trauma injury. The Board found it equitable to assign administration to Broadspire, despite their partial coverage, to avoid confusion given overlapping neck injuries and lien claimants.

ReconsiderationCumulative TraumaCT claimAdministering AwardContributionWrit DeniedLabor Code 5412Labor Code 4656(c)(1)Temporary DisabilityCarpal Tunnel
References
1
Case No. ADJ3633276 (SAC 0360146)
Regular
Jan 24, 2012

GAYE MARTIN vs. LENNAR CORPORATION, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by defendants Lennar Corporation and its third-party administrator, Broadspire. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which recommended denial because the applicant's request to take the case off calendar was granted to allow her to develop her case under a recent *Ogilvie* decision. Additionally, the defendants were admonished for Broadspire's failure to disclose the identity of its client as required by *Coldiron v. Compuware Corp.* and were put on notice that sanctions could be considered at the trial level.

WCABRemovalBroadspireThird-party administratorColdironLabor Code section 3700SanctionsLabor Code section 5813Off calendarMandatory Settlement Conference
References
2
Case No. ADJ6469383
Regular
Nov 30, 2009

KELIY SHEAFFER vs. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, BROADSPIRE BREA

Defendant's petition for removal is granted, rescinding the Order of October 26, 2009, and returning the matter for a mandatory settlement conference.

Petition for RemovalDiscovery ClosedMandatory Settlement ConferencePanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorIndustrial InjuryApplication for Adjudication of ClaimDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedEAMSNotice of RepresentationAnswer to Application
References
0
Case No. ADJ6905244
Regular
Oct 12, 2011

IRIS CARDONA vs. ADECCO, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in the case of Iris Cardona v. Adecco; BroadsPIRE. The applicant alleged an injury from pulling a food cart, but the Board adopted the WCJ's report finding her not credible. Key factors included inconsistencies in her testimony and the failure to produce corroborating witnesses. The Board also noted that alleged violations of LC §3550 and §3551 were raised for the first time on appeal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsideration DeniedAdministrative Law JudgeApplicant CredibilityInjury AOE/COELabor Code §3550Labor Code §3551Labor Code §3600(a)(10)EAMSSpecific Injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ6649578
Regular
Sep 01, 2009

KERMIT BROWN vs. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES, INC., BROADSPIRE BREA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings. This was due to due process concerns regarding the admission of applicant's medical treatment records. The WCJ improperly attempted to admit these records after the discovery deadline and without a ruling on the defendant's objection. The Board will allow further proceedings to properly address the evidence and allow the defendant to respond.

Kermit BrownSecuritas Security ServicesBroadspire BreaADJ6649578Opinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Judge (WCJ)Security GuardRight Knee Injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ9097708
Regular
Jun 28, 2016

MARIA QUEZADA DUENAS vs. PRIDE INDUSTRIES, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Maria Quezada Duenas' Petition for Removal against Pride Industries and Broadspire. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that removal is an extraordinary remedy and the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Furthermore, the applicant did not show that reconsideration would be an inadequate remedy for any potential adverse decision. The WCJ's report also noted a procedural defect in the verification of the petition.

Petition for RemovalWCABExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationProcedural DefectVerificationCumulative TraumaPermanent and Stationary
References
4
Case No. ADJ234831 (VNO 0352113) ADJ2036496 (VNO 0359792)
Regular
Jan 11, 2010

SHARON ABBASI vs. PREMIER AMERICA FEDERAL CREDIT; AMERICAN CASUALTY BROADSPIRE BREA, HARTFORD SACRAMENTO

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied the applicant's petition, upholding the finding of a psychiatric industrial injury resulting from a 1996 bank robbery. The applicant contended the WCJ erred by not finding a non-psychiatric physical injury, specifically fibromyalgia, despite evidence suggesting it. However, the Board agreed with the WCJ that the medical evidence, particularly from Drs. Gillis and Bluestone, failed to objectively substantiate an industrially related fibromyalgia diagnosis.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAmended Joint Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPsychePermanent DisabilityApportionmentBank TellerBank RobberyFibromyalgia
References
4
Case No. ADJ7233668 ADJ7233692 ADJ7941780
Regular
Sep 23, 2014

WALTER MENJIVAR (DECEASED) vs. ABLE BODY LABOR, BROADSPIRE

In *Menjivar (Deceased) v. Able Body Labor; Broadspire*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal. The applicant sought to remove the cases from trial, arguing that an Agreed Medical Evaluator's report indicated a need for psychiatric expertise and that defendants' Declaration of Readiness to Proceed was defective. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that any objections to the DOR were waived due to untimeliness, and that the applicant had prior opportunities to address discovery issues. Defense counsel was also admonished for failing to include her state bar number.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportDEIDRA E. LOWEKATHERINE ZALEWSKIMandatory Settlement ConferenceDeclaration of Readiness to ProceedDOR defectsinformal resolutionpsychiatrist opinion
References
0
Case No. ADJ9164098, ADJ9163276, ADJ10354934
Regular
Nov 27, 2017

NABIL ABD ALLAH vs. MV TRANSPORTATION, INC., BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal filed by MV Transportation, Inc. and Broadspire. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The Board found that the applicant's failure to attend prior medical exams due to distance and transportation issues, and the need for a new medical report for amended claims, did not meet this high standard. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that the order for examinations by physicians closer to the applicant's residence would facilitate the development of the record and serve substantial justice.

Petition for RemovalAppeals Board Rule 10848substantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeMV TransportationInc.Broadspiremedical reporting
References
7
Case No. ADJ1885780
Regular
Jun 02, 2010

SANDRA SHERMAN, SANDRA SMITH vs. GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, BROADSPIRE

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Applicant Sandra Sherman (also known as Sandra Smith) against Graybar Electric Company and BroadsPIRE. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition because it was not verified as required by Labor Code section 5902. Even if it had been verified, the WCAB would have denied the petition on its merits, adopting the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge.

Petition for ReconsiderationVerifiedLabor Code section 5902DismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJReport and RecommendationDeny on the meritsSmith v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Lucena v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 394 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