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. ADJ755792
Regular

KIT DAWSON vs. SAN DIEGO TRANSIT

This case involves Kit Dawson's workers' compensation claim against San Diego Transit. The applicant, Dawson, sought reconsideration of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). The WCAB reviewed the petition and the judge's report. Ultimately, the WCAB denied reconsideration, adopting the reasoning of the administrative law judge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative Law JudgePermit Self-InsuredDenial of ReconsiderationCase ADJ755792Case SDO 0261150
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. 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. 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
Case No. ADJ6766619 (MF) ADJ6766620
Regular
Feb 28, 2018

MARIA DURAN vs. FOREVER 21 RETAIL, INC., CHUBB GROUP

This case involves Maria Duran's request for home health care services, which was initially denied by utilization review (UR) and upheld by Independent Medical Review (IMR). The applicant argued that her need for assistance with household chores and personal hygiene fell outside the scope of the Medical Treatment Utilization Schedule (MTUS) guidelines as applied. While the Board acknowledges that the specific MTUS guideline used in this case was later found to be an invalid regulation in a related case, it affirmed the original decision. This affirmance was based on the finding that the initial request for services was too vague, lacking specific details on the type, frequency, and duration of care, and that a revised request could be made.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria DuranForever 21 RetailInc.Chubb GroupOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationIndependent Medical ReviewIMRUtilization ReviewUR
References
Case No. ADJ3180407 (LAO 0785803)
Regular
Nov 10, 2008

Carl Brewer vs. CAPITAL REPROGRAPHICS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for VILLANOVA INSURANCE, In Liquidation

This case concerns CIGA's petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's award of penalties for various payment failures, including attorney fees, home health care, and a case management nurse. CIGA argues these penalties are not "covered claims" under its statutory exemption. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case to the trial level due to a missing case file.

CIGAVillanova InsurancePenaltiesAttorneys FeesHome Health CareGuardian Ad LitemCase Management NurseInsurance Code Section 1063.1(c)(8)Covered ClaimsReconsideration
References
Case No. ADJ4225526 (GOL 0092072)
Regular
Apr 20, 2017

JESUS ARROYO vs. JOHN CRAVENS PLASTERING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves Jesus Arroyo's petition for reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge. Medical evidence from Dr. Markovitz established that Arroyo suffered a total and permanent disability resulting from industrial injuries, including an aortic aneurysm repair and subsequent strokes. The Board found Dr. Markovitz's opinions constituted substantial medical evidence, despite conflicting defense opinions, and affirmed that all necessary medical care and permanent disability were industrially caused.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardJesus ArroyoJohn Cravens PlasteringState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerGerald Markovitzechocardiogramaortic root dilationexpanding aortic aneurysm
References
Case No. ADJ8588344
En Banc
Oct 26, 2017

Jose Guillermina Rodriguez vs. Garden Plating Co., Intercare Holdings Insurance Services

The Appeals Board consolidated over 1,200 Petitions for Reconsideration from lien claimants regarding a filing deadline. The petitions were dismissed as moot because the challenged administrative action was reversed, and the issue of timeliness was returned to the trial level for case-by-case adjudication.

WCABEn Banc DecisionLien ClaimantsPetitions for ReconsiderationLabor Code 4903.05(c)DeclarationTimelinessMootnessConsolidation of CasesMaster Case
References
Case No. ADJ6951777
Regular
Nov 23, 2010

GINGER LOGAN-CANNON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND/STATE CONTRACTS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The Board rescinded the original September 9, 2010 Findings and Award. A clerical error in a subsequent order setting aside the award, which mistakenly referred to other case numbers, was corrected to include the correct case number. The matter is remanded for further proceedings to address the November 29, 2010 hearing.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardClerical ErrorRescindedRemandWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJAdjusting AgencyLegally UninsuredCompanion Cases
References
Showing 1-10 of 9,629 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