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. ADJ4534513
Regular
Jul 26, 2016

JEFFREY FARMER vs. CITY OF FREMONT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the City of Fremont's petition for reconsideration in the case of *Farmer v. City of Fremont*. This grants the WCAB more time to thoroughly review the factual and legal issues presented in the case. The WCAB will issue a Decision After Reconsideration following this further study. All communications related to the petition should be directed to the Appeals Board's San Francisco office, not district offices or e-filing.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of FremontYORKStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionElectronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS)Trial Level DocumentsPetition for Penalties
References
Case No. ADJ9697744
Regular
May 25, 2018

JASON POIRIER vs. CITY OF MENLO PARK, Permissibly Self-Insured; administered by INNOVATIVE CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, CITY OF BRISBANE; Permissibly Self-Insured; administered by INNOVATIVE CLAIMS SOLUTIONS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the trial judge's decision that denied Jason Poirier's claim for kidney cancer benefits. The Board found that the City of Menlo Park failed to rebut the presumption under Labor Code section 3212.1 that Poirier's cancer was industrially caused. Crucially, the Board ruled that Poirier's prior employment with the City of Brisbane could be combined with his Menlo Park employment to satisfy the minimum latency period for cancer causation, a point the trial judge had incorrectly excluded. Consequently, the Board amended the findings to establish that Poirier sustained an industrial injury and returned the case for benefit determination.

Labor Code section 3212.1renal cell carcinomacarcinogen presumptionrebuttallatency periodcumulative traumapolice officerCity of Menlo ParkCity of Brisbaneindustrial injury
References
Case No. ADJ15875592; ADJ16732971
Regular
Aug 25, 2025

JAIME LLAMAS vs. CITY OF ANAHEIM, CITY OF DOWNEY

Applicant Jaime Llamas, a police officer, sustained a cumulative brain injury (cancer) while employed by the City of Downey and the City of Anaheim. The WCJ found both employers jointly and severally liable. Defendant City of Downey sought reconsideration, challenging the last injurious exposure and their liability for temporary disability. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original Findings and Award, and substituted new findings. The Board confirmed the cumulative injury, clarified employment periods, affirmed the industrial presumption for both employers, established a specific liability period (December 21, 2016, through December 21, 2017) based on medical evidence of latency, and deferred issues of contribution between the employers.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of AnaheimCity of DowneyLabor Code section 4850Labor Code section 3212.1Labor Code section 5500.5last injurious exposurecumulative injurypolice officerbrain cancer
References
Case No. ADJ5829433
Regular
Nov 08, 2017

JESSICA SENQUIZ vs. CITY OF FREMONT, YORK INSURANCE

In this workers' compensation case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reconsidered a prior decision regarding payment for medical services. The defendant reduced payments for epidural steroid injections based on National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI) edits, arguing this was a fee schedule dispute subject to Independent Bill Review (IBR). The WCAB ultimately rescinded the prior decision, finding that disputes over procedure coding, even if not explicitly adopted in the fee schedule, are considered disputes over the amount payable under the Official Medical Fee Schedule. Therefore, the WCAB concluded that such billing disputes are subject to IBR and not within the WCAB's jurisdiction.

WCABJessica SenquizCity of FremontYork InsuranceADJ5829433Opinion and Decision After Reconsiderationtransforaminal epidural steroid injectionsFremont Surgery CenterIndependent Bill Review (IBR)National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI)
References
Case No. ADJ2471707 (OAK 0325825) ADJ1760066 (OAK 0325826)
Regular
Apr 11, 2012

KASSONDRA MORELAND vs. CITY OF UNION CITY, CITY OF SUNNYVALE

This case concerns contribution between two employers for a cumulative trauma injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) amended an arbitrator's decision regarding the date of injury. The WCAB found the date of injury to be December 5, 2005, when the applicant first suffered a wage loss due to medical restrictions. This decision shifts liability for contribution to the employer who employed the applicant during the year preceding this date. A dissenting commissioner argued the date of injury should be later, correlating with the applicant's surgery and receipt of temporary disability benefits.

Cumulative TraumaDate of InjuryLabor Code Section 5412Labor Code Section 5500.5WCABReconsiderationContributionConcurrent EmploymentCity of Union CityCity of Sunnyvale
References
Case No. ADJ9352393, ADJ9352398, ADJ9531390
Regular
Apr 21, 2016

NORMAN WESEMAN vs. CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY, Permissibly Self-Insured, SUPERIOR READY MIX, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case consolidates three workers' compensation claims for applicant Norman Weseman. The Appeals Board affirmed findings that claims against Superior Ready Mix (ADJ9531390) and the City of Cathedral City (ADJ9352398) for heart/hypertension and firefighter injuries were not barred by the statute of limitations. However, the Board rescinded a finding regarding a specific injury claim against the City of Cathedral City (ADJ9352393) due to insufficient medical evidence on the injury's manifestation date and returned it for further proceedings. The core legal issue concerns when the statute of limitations begins to run for latent industrial injuries.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDNorman WesemanCity of Cathedral CitySuperior Ready MixADJ9352393ADJ9352398ADJ9531390Findings and OrdersReconsiderationStatute of Limitations
References
Case No. ADJ11171496; ADJ3047881
Regular
May 19, 2025

DAVID ANTHONY WILSON vs. CITY OF POMONA; ADMINSURE, CITY OF LOS ANGELES

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision addresses a clerical error found in its previous decision from May 15, 2025. The original decision erroneously included Joseph V. Capurro, Commissioner, as a panel member. The current order formally corrects this error by removing Commissioner Capurro's name, without the need for reconsideration. The underlying case involved David Anthony Wilson as the applicant against the City of Pomona, AdminSure, and the City of Los Angeles, with adjudication numbers ADJ11171496 and ADJ3047881, originating from the Pomona District Office. The original May 15, 2025 decision was an Opinion and Order Dismissing Petition For Removal, issued after the petitioner withdrew their request for removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClerical Error CorrectionOpinion and OrderPetition for RemovalJoseph V. CapurroCommissionerDavid Anthony WilsonCity of PomonaCity of Los AngelesAdjudication Numbers
References
Case No. ADJ2151993 (SFO 0507276)
Regular
May 18, 2018

RICHARD JOHNSON vs. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CITY OF PACIFICA

This case concerns the award of appellate costs to the City of Pacifica. The Court of Appeal previously affirmed a decision in Pacifica's favor and ordered the City of South San Francisco (CSSF) to bear Pacifica's costs. Pacifica subsequently submitted a verified petition for costs totaling $1,425.00, which included electronic filing and paper copy expenses. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board found Pacifica's requested costs reasonable and awarded them against CSSF.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemittiturFirst District Court of AppealPetition for ReconsiderationArbitratorPetition for CostsAppellate CostsReimbursementVerified PetitionSubstantiation of Costs
References
Case No. ADJ4569483 (STK 0214134)
Regular
Sep 18, 2012

Samuel Turco vs. CITY OF OAKLAND, Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the City of Oakland's petition for reconsideration, overturning a prior finding that Samuel Turco's cumulative trauma heart injury claim was not time-barred. The Board determined that Turco knew or should have known his disability was industrially caused by no later than February 10, 2007, when he sought legal advice and filed a claim related to his 2002 heart attack. Since his claim against the City of Oakland was filed in April 2008, it was deemed barred by the one-year statute of limitations under Labor Code section 5405. Consequently, Turco's claim against the City of Oakland was dismissed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ4569483Samuel TurcoCity of Oaklandcumulative trauma injuryheart and cardiovascular systempolice officerLabor Code section 3212.5statute of limitationsknowledge of compensable disability
References
Case No. SAL 0084267, SAL 0084268, SAL 0090529
Regular
Jan 04, 2008

LARRY MYERS vs. CITY OF SALINAS

In this workers' compensation case, the defendant City of Salinas sought reconsideration of an award granting the applicant, a police captain, 84% permanent disability and lifelong pension. The defendant argued for apportionment of disability to non-industrial causes, disputing the applicability of the Labor Code section 3213.2 "duty belt" presumption. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the defendant had previously stipulated to the presumption's applicability and that the applicant independently qualified for it based on his employment history and duty belt usage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLarry MyersCity of SalinasFindings Award OrdersWCJindustrial injuriesleft kneelower extremitiesspineleft shoulder
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,227 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