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. ADJ1360622 (ANA 0407664)
Regular
Jul 22, 2013

LUCIUS SANFORD vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS\/CLEVELAND BROWNS, BUFFALO BILLS

This case concerns an applicant's workers' compensation claim against the Cleveland Browns for injuries sustained as a professional football player. The Appeals Board, reconsidering a prior award, determined that the Browns and the applicant were exempt from California workers' compensation jurisdiction under Labor Code section 3600.5(b). This exemption applies when an employee is hired outside of California, temporarily works within the state, and the employer provides coverage under another state's laws that reciprocally exempts such arrangements. Consequently, the prior award was rescinded, and the Browns were dismissed as a defendant, with the case returned for further proceedings.

WCABADJ1360622Lucius SanfordBaltimore RavensCleveland BrownsBuffalo BillsLabor Code Section 3600.5(b)Findings And AwardWCJpermanent disability
References
Case No. ADJ14657802
Regular
Sep 19, 2022

STEVE LAUTER vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS FKA CLEVELAND BROWNS, PERMISSIBLY SELF-INSURED, ADMINISTERED BY BERKLEY ENTERTAINMENT, SAN DIEGO CHARGERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION FOR FREMONT INSURANCE, IN LIQUIDATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior ruling and amended a finding of fact. The Board affirmed that California lacked personal jurisdiction over the Baltimore Ravens (formerly Cleveland Browns) for applicant's claimed injuries. The decision found no evidence of a contract formed in California and that the applicant's activities with the Browns, including games played in California, occurred after his release and were not connected to his claimed injury. The Board also declined to disturb the WCJ's reliance on pre-2005 medical-legal procedures.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPersonal JurisdictionSubject Matter JurisdictionMinimum ContactsSpecial AppearanceContract of HireOffer and AcceptanceOral ContractForum StateLabor Code Section 4062
References
Case No. ADJ6696775, ADJ7402305
Regular
Apr 27, 2012

ANDRICK COREY JACKSON vs. DENVER BRONCOS AND CLEVELAND BROWNS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a February 13, 2012 Findings and Award at the request of defendant Cleveland Browns. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a preliminary review indicating a need for further study of factual and legal issues. The Board seeks a complete understanding of the record to issue a just decision. Pending a Decision After Reconsideration, all filings must be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not to district offices or through e-filing.

ADJ6696775ADJ7402305WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDANDRICK COREY JACKSONDENVER BRONCOSCLEVELAND BROWNSPermissibly Self-InsuredOPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ6426842
Regular
Jul 22, 2013

DAN FIKE vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS/CLEVELAND BROWNS

This case concerns a claim for cumulative industrial injury by a professional football player against his former employer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's decision that California lacked jurisdiction over the claim. This was based on Labor Code section 3600.5(b), which exempts employees hired outside California and temporarily working within the state, provided the employer has extraterritorial coverage with another state that reciprocally exempts California. The employer, the Browns, successfully demonstrated these conditions were met under Ohio law.

Labor Code section 3600.5extraterritorial provisionsregularly employedtemporarily in Californiahired outside of Californiaself-insured employerOhio workers' compensation lawsCalifornia workers' compensation lawcumulative industrial injuryprofessional football player
References
Case No. ADJ7093682
Regular
Apr 20, 2012

MICHAEL JAMESON vs. CLEVELAND BROWNS

This case involves a professional football player's cumulative trauma injury claim. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the lower court's decision to allow further review. Key issues include the WCAB's subject matter jurisdiction, particularly under Labor Code section 3600.5(b) concerning temporary employment in California, and contradictory findings regarding the injury date. The WCAB also found a $750 sanction against the defendant's counsel was improperly imposed without due process.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCaliforniaMichael JamesonCleveland BrownsReconsiderationAmended Findings and Award and OrderCumulative Trauma InjuryProfessional Football PlayerPermanent DisabilityStatute of Limitations
References
Case No. ADJ6836629
Regular
Oct 01, 2013

EVERSON WALLS vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS fka CLEVELAND BROWNS, NEW YORK GIANTS, PMA INSURANCE GROUP c/o GALLAGHER BASSETT and NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA c/o CHARTIS CLAIMS INC., DALLAS COWBOYS, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns Everson Walls' workers' compensation claim against the Cleveland Browns (now Baltimore Ravens) for an injury sustained while playing professional football. The Board found that Walls was only temporarily employed in California and that the Browns, as a self-insured Ohio employer, provided coverage under Ohio law, which reciprocates California's extraterritorial provisions. Consequently, the Browns are exempted from California workers' compensation law under Labor Code §3600.5(b), and are therefore dismissed from the case.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code §3600.5(b)National Football LeagueNFLProfessional Football PlayerCumulative Trauma InjuryTemporary Employee ExemptionExtraterritorial CoverageOhio Bureau of Workers' CompensationSelf-Insured Employer
References
Case No. ADJ7198621
Regular
Jan 18, 2012

Sultan McCullough vs. Cleveland Browns, et al.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the Cleveland Browns' petition for reconsideration as untimely. The Browns failed to file their petition within the 25-day deadline applicable to their California-based attorneys after the initial award was issued on December 19, 2011. Although the petition was untimely, the WCAB indicated that it would have been denied on the merits as well. The WCAB found sufficient evidence to establish subject matter jurisdiction, concluding that applicant Sultan McCullough likely signed his contract in California, his home address.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSubject Matter JurisdictionContract of HireTimelinessLabor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsProof of ServiceAdministrative Law JudgeFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ10737420, ADJ11230735
Regular
May 28, 2019

METHVEN BROWN (Deceased), JANINE BROWN (Widow) vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Permissibly Self-Insured, SACRAMENTO COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding no industrial injury to the decedent's heart or cerebrovascular system. The widow argued the administrative law judge erred by disallowing further discovery from a cardiologist. However, the Board adopted the judge's report, which noted a neurologist already testified that heart trouble and industrial stress were not medically probable causes of the decedent's stroke and death. The applicants failed to demonstrate why a cardiologist would be more competent to offer such opinions.

Methven BrownJanine BrownCounty of SacramentoSacramento County Probation DepartmentADJ10737420ADJ11230735Petition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and Orderindustrial injuryheart injury
References
Case No. ADJ8022272
Regular
Jan 17, 2014

DICK AMBROSE vs. BALTIMORE RAVENS/CLEVELAND BROWNS

This case concerns Dick Ambrose's workers' compensation claim against the Baltimore Ravens/Cleveland Browns. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that California's workers' compensation jurisdiction was exempt under Labor Code Section 3600.5(b) because the applicant was only temporarily in California and the employer provided coverage under Ohio law. The Appeals Board affirmed the ALJ's decision, largely adopting the ALJ's reasoning regarding the admissibility of evidence and the application of Section 3600.5(b). Commissioner Sweeney dissented, arguing that the applicant's routine work in California over a decade made his presence more than temporary, and also raised concerns about Ohio's reciprocal protections and the employer's self-insurance compliance.

Labor Code Section 3600.5(b)exemption from California jurisdictiontemporary presenceextraterritorial provisionsOhio Revised Codeself-insurancemandatory settlement conferencecumulative injuryprofessional football playeradministrative law judge
References
Case No. ADJ9095473
Regular
Mar 24, 2023

EVAN MOORE vs. CLEVELAND BROWNS, SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, PHILADELPHIA EAGLES, GREEN BAY PACKERS, GREAT DIVIDE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted petitions for reconsideration filed by the Cleveland Browns and Great Divide Insurance Company. The Board's prior decision finding California jurisdiction based on a contract of hire formed in California was vacated. The Board determined the existing record was insufficient to definitively establish the location of contract formation and the agent's authority. The case is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings to develop the record on jurisdiction, contract formation, and potential exemptions.

California jurisdictioncontract of hirereconsiderationpetitionfindings of factoral contractfederal preemptionagency authorityintegration clauseliability exemptions
References
Showing 1-10 of 127 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