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. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ5631403 ADJ8129890 ADJ9031437 ADJ7129072 ADJ8214161
Regular
Aug 12, 2019

VALERIE SPENCER vs. MENDON AND MENDON, INC., dba MENDON'S NURSERY

This case concerns Valerie Spencer's claim that her employer, Mendon and Mendon, Inc., violated Labor Code section 132a by terminating her employment due to her workers' compensation claim. The Appeals Board rescinded a prior finding, concluding that the employer's actions constituted discrimination under section 132a. This decision was based on the close temporal proximity between the notice of representation and termination, and the employer's failure to establish a legitimate business reason. Issues regarding penalty amounts, lost wages, and reinstatement are deferred for further proceedings.

Labor Code 132aDiscriminationRetaliationWorkers' Compensation ClaimTerminationNotice of RepresentationPrima Facie CaseBusiness Realities DefensePretextLost Wages
References
Case No. ADJ9427877
Regular
Apr 20, 2020

KARL KURTZ vs. WESCO AIRCRAFT HARDWARE, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case concerns an employer's termination of an employee while he was on temporary disability due to a back injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the finding that the termination violated Labor Code section 132a, finding the employer's stated reasons of relocation and claim denial constituted unlawful discrimination. While the employee is entitled to lost wage reimbursement from June 1, 2016, to October 9, 2018, issues regarding reinstatement and further wage loss remain deferred for further proceedings. The Board also affirmed the finding that the employee's injury was not due to his own serious and willful misconduct.

Labor Code Section 132aserious and willful misconductdiscriminationretaliationreinstatementlost wagestemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityserious and willful misconduct of employeeserious and willful misconduct of employer
References
Case No. ADJ8741812
Regular
May 20, 2019

STEVEN ALFARO vs. AYERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE GROUP

This case involves an employer, Ayers Construction Company, accused of discriminating against an employee, Steven Alfaro, for exercising his workers' compensation rights under Labor Code section 132a. The applicant alleged he was terminated shortly after requesting medical treatment, and despite a medical release, was denied reinstatement while other, less senior employees were retained. The Appeals Board affirmed the prior decision finding discrimination, determining the employer failed to provide a credible business necessity for the discharge. The employer must pay increased compensation, back wages and benefits, with adjustments for temporary disability payments received.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLabor Code section 132adiscriminationretaliationreinstatementincreased compensationback wagesbenefitstemporary disabilitymedical treatment
References
Case No. ADJ18890787; ADJ10622598; ADJ10936287; ADJ11180688
Regular
Apr 01, 2025

Kevin Perry vs. Asset Protection and Security Services L.P., Insurance Company of the State of PA

The applicant, Kevin Perry, sought reconsideration of a prior Order Dismissing Case with Prejudice, which was based on the doctrine of res judicata. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) acknowledged that the petition was timely filed within the 60-day statutory period. However, due to the absence of a complete evidentiary record from the lower tribunal, the WCAB was unable to adequately review the applicant's contentions. Consequently, the Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed as premature, and the matter was returned to the Presiding Workers' Compensation Judge (PWCJ) with a recommendation to treat the original petition as one to set aside the initial Order Dismissing, allowing for further proceedings and a new decision that can then be subject to reconsideration.

Res judicataVexatious litigantPetition for reconsiderationOrder dismissing case with prejudiceLabor Code section 5909Cumulative traumaAsset Protection and Security ServicesGallagher Bassett ServicesAIG ClaimsApplication for Adjudication of Claim
References
Case No. ADJ4323884 (VNO 0539846) ADJ3206055 (VNO 0539850)
Regular
May 28, 2013

ROSE WALTON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION/CA STATE PRISONS/LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Legally Uninsured, Adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration for case ADJ4323884, upholding a prior WCJ decision that replaced an earlier award vacated due to a writ of review. For case ADJ3206055, the Board granted reconsideration and reinstated a June 12, 2012, Findings and Award. This reinstated award found the applicant sustained a specific injury on November 9, 1998, resulting in 2% permanent disability. The Board treated the later vacating order in ADJ3206055 as relating back to an earlier order in ADJ4323884.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardVacating OrderReinstatementPermanent DisabilitySpecific InjuryLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundAdministrative Law Judge
References
Case No. ADJ2823835 (STK 0215423)
Regular
Apr 02, 2012

ADRIANA GAMINO vs. C.J.K. ASSOCIATES, LLC.;CRMBC; AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration after the defendant notified them of a settlement. The previous decision approving a Compromise and Release is rescinded. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and decision by the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge. If the settlement is not approved, the original decision may be reinstated.

Petition for ReconsiderationRescinded OrderCompromise and ReleaseTrial LevelWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeFurther ProceedingsDecision After ReconsiderationAppeals BoardApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ2987188 (LBO 0277672) ADJ6543172
Regular
Sep 15, 2015

LUPE CHAVEZ vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

This order denies Lupe Chavez's Petition for Reconsideration in her workers' compensation case against the County of Los Angeles and Tristar Risk Management. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report. Therefore, the denial of reconsideration stands.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportDenying ReconsiderationCounty of Los AngelesTristar Risk ManagementCase Number ADJ2987188Case Number ADJ6543172San FranciscoCalifornia
References
Case No. ADJ4265919
Regular
Mar 02, 2009

F. GAITAN vs. K&S FARMS, COMP WEST INSURANCE

This case involves an applicant who sustained an industrial injury and was subsequently terminated by his employer, K&S Farms, while on temporary disability. The applicant filed a claim alleging discrimination under Labor Code section 132a, arguing the termination was a penalty for his injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the employer's petition for reconsideration, rescinded the prior award, and found no violation of section 132a. The Board determined the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that his termination was "because of" his industrial injury, as required by law.

Labor Code section 132adiscriminationprima facie caseindustrial injurydetrimentdisparate treatmenteconomic justificationbusiness necessitytemporary disabilityreinstatement
References
Case No. FRE 0191303
Regular
Nov 27, 2007

NORMA OZUNA vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a finding that the defendant was not responsible for the costs of the applicant's vocational expert. The WCAB remanded the case to the trial level for further analysis, instructing the judge to consider the factors outlined in *Costa v. Hardy Diagnostic* regarding the reasonableness and necessity of expert costs. The decision does not comment on the merits of whether the costs are ultimately reimbursable.

Vocational expert costsLabor Code section 5811Costa v. Hardy DiagnosticPermanent Disability Rating ScheduleAppeals Board en banccumulative traumaHepatitis Ccorrectional officeragreed medical evaluatorfindings of fact and award
References
Showing 1-10 of 9,691 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