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 0784107
Regular

THELMA CUADRA vs. COMMUNITY HOME CARE, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, CHRISTINE GATES, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a worker's compensation claim for an admitted industrial injury sustained in 2000. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior ruling that dismissed CIGA and found Fireman's Fund liable. The WCAB rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the trial level for further development of the record. This is necessary because neither party provided sufficient evidence, specifically insurance policies, to determine if Fireman's Fund coverage constitutes "other insurance" which would affect CIGA's liability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationCIGACredit General Insurance CompanyFireman's Fund Insurance CompanyCommunity Home CareChristine GatesGeneral EmployerSpecial EmployerIndustrial Injury
References
Case No. ADJ11184146, ADJ11184147
Regular
Oct 24, 2019

ABEL PEREZ ROBLES vs. GATE GOURMET, INC.; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's August 8, 2019 decision in the case of Abel Perez Robles v. Gate Gourmet, Inc. The Board rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings. This action is not a final determination on the merits, and parties retain their rights to seek reconsideration of any subsequent WCJ decision.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRescinded DecisionFurther ProceedingsWCJ ReportAdministrative Law JudgeDecision After ReconsiderationTrial LevelGate GourmetZurich North America
References
Case No. ADJ8381778
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

GERALD BROWN vs. GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM, LIBERTY MUTUAL

In this workers' compensation case, the applicant, Gerald Brown, filed a Petition for Removal and a Petition for Disqualification against Golden Gate Petroleum and Liberty Mutual. The defendants subsequently withdrew both petitions after entering into a Compromise and Release agreement. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed both petitions as moot, as they were withdrawn and the settlement was approved by the WCJ. Therefore, no further action will be taken on the dismissed petitions.

Petition for RemovalPetition for DisqualificationCompromise and ReleaseWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ8381778mootwithdrawn petitionsdismissaladministrative law judge
References
Case No. ADJ6594236
Regular
Aug 12, 2014

HERMALINDA AVILA vs. GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM, INC., EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Golden Gate Petroleum, Inc. and Employers Insurance of Wausau's Petition for Reconsideration. The dismissal was due to the petition being filed untimely. Specifically, the defendants failed to file within the 20-day statutory period for reconsideration, plus an additional 5 days for mailing. Therefore, the WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's recommendation and dismissed the petition as procedurally defective.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissedUntimelyLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013WCJ Report and RecommendationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGolden Gate PetroleumInc.Employers Insurance of Wausau
References
Case No. ADJ6770647
Regular
Jul 21, 2010

AMY CHRISTINE LENTINE vs. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FULLERTON, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of the WCJ's decision regarding Amy Christine Lentine's claim. The Board affirmed the finding that the claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. However, the issue of whether Lentine sustained an industrial injury was deferred and remanded to the WCJ for further proceedings. This means the compensability of the injury itself still needs to be determined.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAMY CHRISTINE LENTINECALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FULLERTONSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESADJ6770647RECONSIDERATIONSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONSINDUSTRIAL INJURYPSYCHETEETH
References
Case No. ADJ7176285
Regular
May 23, 2011

FRANCISCO CASAS LEYVA vs. WAR MART #2242, AVIZENT FRANK GATES SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration of a prior decision regarding Francisco Casas Leyva's claim against War Mart \#2242 and Avizent Frank Gates Services. The WCAB adopted the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCALJ) in its decision. The Board also gave great weight to the WCALJ's credibility findings. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was formally denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFrancisco Casas LeyvaWar MartAvizent Frank Gates ServicesOrder Denying ReconsiderationPetition for Reconsiderationworkers' compensation administrative law judgeWCJGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.credibility finding
References
Case No. ADJ963026
Regular
Apr 30, 2013

BRODERICK CRAWFORD vs. AC TRANSIT, GATES MCDONALD

This case involves applicant Broderick Crawford's claim for continuing temporary total disability benefits following a 2000 work injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision. The ALJ found Dr. Blackwell's medical opinion to be more persuasive than Dr. Auerbach's, and this constituted substantial evidence to support the award of benefits. The Board affirmed that a single physician's well-reasoned opinion can be sufficient evidence, even if it conflicts with other medical evaluations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAC TransitGates McDonaldBroderick CrawfordPetition for ReconsiderationReport of WCJsubstantial evidencephysician opiniontemporary total disabilitybilateral hips
References
Case No. ADJ975351 (SFO0511587)
Regular
Jul 11, 2011

BURNADINE GASKIN vs. K & L GATES, LLP., SENTRY SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Burnadine Gaskin's Petition for Reconsideration and dismissed her Petition for Removal. Gaskin sought reconsideration of supplemental findings that she did not sustain a neck injury in addition to her upper extremities, nor require further medical treatment due to her employment with K & L Gates, LLP. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found no causal connection between Gaskin's employment at K & L Gates and any ongoing disability or need for medical treatment, citing expert medical opinion. The dismissal of the removal petition was due to the final decision being addressed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalSupplemental Findings of Factinjury to upper extremitieslegal secretarycumulative injurySentry Select Insurance CompanyTremblath doctrineColonial Ins. Co.
References
Case No. ADJ3817494 (LAO 0863722)
Regular
Jun 21, 2017

CHRISTINE RANGEL vs. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT, INC

Applicant Rangel petitioned for reconsideration of a WCJ's award finding industrial injury and $63\%$ permanent disability, arguing she was permanently and totally disabled. Following a Commissioners' Settlement Conference, the parties executed a Compromise and Release agreement. The Board, after reviewing the agreement and the record, found it adequate and in the applicant's best interest, rescinded the prior award, and approved the Compromise and Release. This action included releasing any potential death benefit claims and approving the agreed-upon attorney's fees.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardChristine RangelHoneywell International IncZurich North AmericaMatrix Absence Management IncReconsiderationFindings and AwardCardiovascular system injuryPsyche injurySleep disorder
References
Case No. ADJ7433185, ADJ7605177, ADJ7632504
Regular
Dec 07, 2012

Christine Held vs. Stanislaus County Housing Authority, Permissibly Self-Insured, administered by Innovative Claims Solutions

The Board amended the original order, finding the employer waived its right to object to the applicant's spinal surgery due to a failure to timely object to the proposed treatment. However, the Board denied the applicant's request for a penalty under Labor Code section 5814 and attorney's fees under section 5814.5, as the issue of a penalty was not appropriate for an expedited hearing and there was insufficient evidence of unreasonable delay. The matter was returned to the trial level.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStanislaus County Housing AuthorityInnovative Claims SolutionsChristine HeldADJ7433185ADJ7605177ADJ7632504Fresno District OfficeOpinion and Decision After ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and Order
References
Showing 1-10 of 71 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