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. ADJ1160304 (AHM 0123404) ADJ1025764 (AHM 0123405) ADJ3228397 (ANA 0363148)
Regular
Mar 02, 2009

RICHARD JESUS RIVERO vs. LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF LONG BEACH

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award finding temporary total disability (TTD) for an applicant police officer. The defendant argued there was no medical evidence for TTD and that the applicant's termination for misconduct disqualified him from Labor Code section 4850 benefits. The Board found the medical evidence regarding TTD was inconsistent and required further development by the trial judge. Additionally, the judge must clarify the applicant's termination circumstances and their impact on section 4850 benefits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLong Beach Police DepartmentCity of Long BeachRichard Jesus RiveroADJ1160304ADJ1025764ADJ3228397ReconsiderationTemporary Total DisabilityLabor Code Section 4850
References
Case No. ADJ7254561 ADJ7254565
Regular
Dec 21, 2018

GREG WALLOCH vs. CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding an awarded permanent disability. The Board upheld the finding that the defendant was not entitled to credit for overpaid permanent disability advances in one case against an award in another. The Board found the defendant's arguments regarding public gift and inequity to be without merit, emphasizing the applicant's good faith and the defendant's awareness of the cumulative trauma injury for an extended period. The decision highlights the Board's discretion in allowing credit for overpayments, balancing equities and applicant hardship.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGreg WallochCity of Laguna Beach Police DepartmentJoint Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityCreditOverpaymentCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryMaximum Medical Improvement
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. 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
Case No. ADJ6990407
Regular
Nov 02, 2011

DANIEL CHESNUT vs. MANTECA POLICE DEPARTMENT, MUNICIPAL POOLING WALNUT CREEK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The applicant, a police officer, sought to establish that his testicular cancer was presumptively industrial under Labor Code section 3212.1. However, the Agreed Medical Evaluator concluded that the cancer's manifestation fell outside the established ten-year minimum latency period for solid tumors, thus rebutting the statutory presumption. The Board found this conclusion to be substantial evidence, particularly as the applicant's cancer was not characterized by extreme aggressiveness or massive exposure doses that might shorten latency.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDaniel ChesnutManteca Police DepartmentMunicipal Pooling Walnut CreekADJ6990407Petition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 3212.1testicular cancerinjurious exposurepolice officer
References
Case No. ADJ3255721 (SFO 0500284) ADJ1045902 (SFO 0500285)
Regular
Jan 23, 2012

Ronald S. Verna vs. City of Los Altos Police Department

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the City of Los Altos Police Department's petition for reconsideration. The Board affirmed the finding that the applicant sustained a compensable sleep disorder as a consequence of industrial injuries, necessitating a CPAP machine. This decision was based on the treating physician's opinion and applicant's credible testimony, and the partial compromise and release agreement explicitly preserved future medical care. The Board found the defendant's arguments regarding substantial evidence, the compromise and release, and the need for a petition to reopen to be without merit.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Los Altos Police DepartmentRonald S. VernaPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardSleep DisorderCompensable ConsequenceCPAP MachineSelf-Procured ExpenseCompromise and Release
References
Case No. ADJ8241674
Regular
Dec 24, 2014

DAMON BAGLEY vs. CITY OF CLOVIS POLICE DEPARTMENT

This case concerns whether a police officer injured in a commute-related car accident sustained an industrial injury. The Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ's finding, determining the injury was not compensable under the "going and coming" rule. The majority found no special mission because the employer lacked sufficient control and the officer's early arrival provided no clear benefit. A dissenting opinion argued the officer fell under the uniformed officer exception and was on a special mission due to the emergency call-in.

Going and coming ruleSpecial mission exceptionIndustrial injuryWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of Clovis Police DepartmentUniformed officer exceptionMotor vehicle accidentCall-inEmergency callDepartment-issued cell phone
References
Case No. ADJ7850439
Regular
Oct 15, 2012

Edgar Tabo vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT

The applicant, a police officer, injured himself in an off-duty bicycle crash. The Board denied compensation because the applicant failed to establish that his subjective belief of needing to train for an optional bicycle patrol course was objectively reasonable. His off-duty recreational activity did not meet the requirements for an exception to the exclusion for such injuries under Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, the applicant takes nothing by way of his claim.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEdgar TaboCity and County of San Francisco Police DepartmentPermissibly Self-InsuredADJ7850439Oakland District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardWCJindustrial 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. ADJ6773331 ADJ7296677
Regular
Dec 11, 2015

REHAN NAZIR vs. CITY OF TORRANCE POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF TORRANCE

This case involves a remand from the Court of Appeal to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) for the award of attorney's fees. Applicant's counsel successfully responded to the defendant's Petition for Writ of Review, prompting the appellate court's order. The parties have stipulated to a reasonable fee of $10,000 for these appellate services. The WCAB has issued an award of this $10,000 in additional attorney's fees to the Law Offices of Lawrence R. Whiting, payable to the applicant's counsel in addition to any other compensation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRehan NazirCity of Torrance Police DepartmentADJ6773331ADJ7296677Long Beach District OfficeOpinion and AwardAdditional Attorney's FeesLabor Code § 5801Labor Code § 5811
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,271 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