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. ADJ8026817
Regular
Apr 22, 2013

MARIA OCHOA vs. RANGERS DIE CASTING COMPANY, COMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained injury to her respiratory system and psyche AOE/COE. The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr. Lipper and Dr. Curtis lacked substantiality. Specifically, the physicians failed to provide clear diagnoses, quantify exposures, or adequately explain causation. The Board noted contradictory testimony from the applicant's supervisor and insufficient evidence to support the initial findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMaria OchoaRangers Die Casting CompanyCOMPWEST INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8026817Los Angeles District OfficeOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
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. ADJ8602126
Regular
Nov 09, 2016

SERGIO QUINTERO vs. THE GROWING COMPANY, TOWER INSURANCE AND AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration in the case of Quintero v. The Growing Company. The WCAB adopted and incorporated the reasoning from the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report. The order specifies that the petition for reconsideration is dismissed. Commissioner Caplane, involved in a prior decision, was unavailable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationDismissedWCJ reportAdministrative Law JudgeSergio QuinteroThe Growing CompanyTower InsuranceAmtrust North AmericaADJ8602126
References
Case No. ADJ6651801
Regular
Jul 19, 2010

ESIQUIO GONZALEZ vs. VON'S GROCERY COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petitions for reconsideration of a previous decision. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and the need for further review of the factual and legal issues. The WCAB seeks a complete understanding of the record to issue a just and reasoned decision after reconsideration. All future filings related to this case should be directed to the Office of the Commissioners in San Francisco, not a local office.

GonzalezVon's Grocery CompanyPetitions for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ6651801ADJ3758568Decision After Reconsiderationstatutory time constraintsfactual and legal issuesjust and reasoned decision
References
Case No. ADJ11624608
Regular
Jul 16, 2025

LAUREL SMITH vs. STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

The Petition for Reconsideration and/or Alternatively Removal, concerning a decision issued on May 13, 2025, has been voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner. As a result of this withdrawal, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has ordered the dismissal of the petition. This dismissal is effective as of July 16, 2025.

Petition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWithdrawn PetitionDismissal OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardStarbucks Coffee CompanySedgwick Claims Management ServicesLaurel SmithAdjudication NumberSan Luis Obispo District Office
References
Case No. ADJ6564669
Regular
Dec 06, 2011

JEANNE HORTON vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In **ADJ6564669**, the defendant petitioned for reconsideration of a September 27, 2011 Findings of Fact. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition because a preliminary review indicated the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. This action is to ensure a complete understanding of the record and enable a just decision. All future communications must be filed with the Office of the Commissioners in San Francisco.

ReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardGovernor's Office of Emergency ServicesState Compensation Insurance FundStatutory time constraintsFactual and legal issuesDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the Commissioners
References
Case No. ADJ1623600 (MON 0354197) ADJ974474 (MON 0332412)
Regular
Dec 10, 2010

ODILA VALLADARES vs. J.A.M. INDUSTRIES, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE/ AIG

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a September 14, 2010 decision. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a need for further study of the factual and legal issues. The Board aims to achieve a complete understanding of the record to issue a just and reasoned decision. All future communications should be directed to the Appeals Board Commissioners in San Francisco, not a local office, pending a Decision After Reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesDecision After ReconsiderationOffice of the CommissionersDeputy CommissionerAlfonso J. MoresiNeil P. Sullivan
References
Case No. ADJ1577836
Regular
May 04, 2009

JESUS GAVINO-REMIGIO vs. STRATUS SERVICES GROUP, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant injured when stepping on a metal hook, sustaining an admitted industrial injury to his right foot. The applicant sought reconsideration after the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) denied findings that the injury also affected his internal systems (diabetes), eyes, and psyche, along with associated disability. The Board denied reconsideration, finding the defendant's medical expert's opinion on non-industrial diabetes causation to be substantial evidence, while deeming the applicant's medical experts' opinions insufficient. A dissenting commissioner argued the applicant's medical evidence sufficiently supported industrial causation for diabetes aggravation, warranting reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardindustrial injuryright footinternal systemseyespsychediabetes mellituspermanent disabilitytemporary disabilityGerald Markovitz M.D.
References
Case No. ADJ6884562
Regular
Oct 04, 2010

ERIC KRUSE vs. CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case concerns whether a 15% reduction in permanent disability indemnity applies when an employer offers an injured employee regular work after their condition is permanent and stationary. The applicant, a parking enforcement officer, sustained a neck and elbow injury and was temporarily disabled before returning to his regular job. The employer offered regular work after the applicant's condition became permanent and stationary, but the applicant had already returned to his normal duties. The majority found that since there was no indication of permanent disability prior to the employer's offer, all permanent indemnity was payable after the offer, entitling the employer to the reduction. However, a dissenting commissioner argued that the offer lacked practical meaning as the applicant had already returned to work and that no weekly payments remained after the offer to be reduced.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardEric KruseCity of San Rafaelparking enforcement officerindustrial injuryneck injuryright elbow injurytemporary total disabilitypermanent and stationaryoffer of regular work
References
Case No. ADJ7661799
Regular
Nov 20, 2012

ELIU OBESO GARCIA vs. THE KROGER COMPANY dba FOOD 4 LESS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SE

This case before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board involves Eliu Obeso and defendant The Kroger Company. The Board issued an Opinion and Order Granting Reconsideration. Pending a decision after reconsideration, all future filings and communications are to be submitted in writing directly to the Office of the Commissioners in San Francisco, not to any district office or via e-filing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDReconsiderationELIU OBESOTHE KROGER COMPANYFOOD 4 LESSPermissibly Self-InsuredSEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICESADJ7661799Riverside District OfficeOPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION
References
Showing 1-10 of 849 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