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. ADJ377932 (SRO 140247)
Regular
Sep 07, 2010

BARBARA PENNY vs. COMMUNITY ACTON PARTNERSHIP OF SONOMA COUNTY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award concerning applicant Barbara Penny's industrial injury. The WCAB rescinded the award and returned the matter for further proceedings. This decision was primarily based on the need to properly develop the record regarding the applicant's diminished future earning capacity (DFEC), specifically concerning the methodology for calculating lost earnings. The WCAB also noted that the applicant's claim for further medical treatment for body parts beyond the low back could be raised again at the trial level.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardBarbara PennyCommunity Action Partnership of Sonoma CountyState Compensation Insurance FundADJ377932Opinion and Order Granting Petitions for ReconsiderationDecision After ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryCase Manager
References
Case No. ADJ8128282
Regular
Jan 23, 2014

ANGELA EGBIKUADJE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case for further proceedings. The defendant, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, argued that the applicant's psychiatric injury claim was preempted by the ADA and not proven under Labor Code section 3208.3. The Board found the original decision lacked proper analysis regarding predominant industrial causation and the good faith personnel action defense. Therefore, the case was remanded for further development of the record, including expert medical opinion on these issues.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAngela EgbikuadjeCalifornia Department of Corrections and RehabilitationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundADJ8128282Van Nuys District OfficeReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative trauma injury
References
Case No. ADJ8984436
Regular
Aug 30, 2019

GUADALUPE RODRIGUEZ vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

This case involves applicant Guadalupe Rodriguez's claim for a psychiatric and internal system injury against County of Riverside. The administrative law judge (WCJ) denied the claim, finding it was substantially caused by lawful, good faith personnel actions under Labor Code Section 3208.3(h). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's decision, and returned the case for further proceedings. This was because the WCJ and the medical evaluator's analyses regarding personnel actions and causation were deficient, requiring further development of the record.

Labor Code Section 3208.3(h)psychiatric injuryinternal system injurygood faith personnel actionsCounty of San Bernardino v. WCAB (McCoy)substantial causepredominant causeagreed medical evaluator (AME)qualified medical evaluator (PQME)Rolda analysis
References
Case No. ADJ2165521
Regular
Mar 26, 2009

RICHARD HADDAD vs. COUNTY OF SONOMA, REMIF

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denies the Petition for Removal filed by Richard Haddad, the applicant, against the County of Sonoma and REMIF. The WCAB adopted the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge and found no basis to grant removal. Therefore, the petition was denied.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPetition for RemovalDENIEDCOUNTY OF SONOMAREMIFADJ2165521SRO 0128011ADJ128765SFO 0490343administrative law judge
References
Case No. ADJ3380228 (SRO 0133900)
Regular
Mar 09, 2009

LISSA PORTER (PAIZ) vs. COUNTY OF SONOMA

The Court of Appeal denied the defendant County of Sonoma's petition for writ of review, finding no reasonable basis for it. Consequently, the Court granted the applicant's request for attorney fees and remanded the case for an additional award. The parties subsequently stipulated to $3,250.00 for the applicant's attorney's fees and costs. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board approved this stipulation and ordered the defendant to pay the specified amount.

Labor Code § 5801Attorney's FeesWrit of ReviewRemittiturSupplemental AwardBragg and AssociatesWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardCounty of SonomaHanna BrophyMark Weinberger
References
Case No. ADJ7523416
Regular
Jul 10, 2013

ROSAICELA ALEJANDRE vs. COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by applicant Rosaicela Alejandre. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition as untimely. The WCAB adopted the administrative law judge's report which found the petition was filed more than 25 days after the November 19, 2012, Order Dismissing the 132(a) Application. This delay violated the 20-day filing period under Labor Code section 5903, plus the 5-day extension for mailing.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimelyLabor Code section 5903Code of Civil Procedure section 1013Order DismissingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeReport and Recommendation132(a) ApplicationWCAB
References
Case No. ADJ6657560
Regular
Jul 08, 2013

MADELINE PORTER vs. TARZANA TREATMENT CENTERS

This case involves a psychiatric technician claiming industrial injury due to workplace harassment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing the finding of industrial psychiatric injury. The Board determined that the applicant's psychiatric injury was substantially caused by lawful, good faith personnel actions, which are barred under Labor Code section 3208.3(h). However, the Board affirmed the finding of orthopedic permanent disability, reducing it to 6%.

Good faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3(h)psychiatric injury causationsubstantial causereprimandsverbal criticismCounty of Sacramento v. BrooksLarch v. Contra Costa CountyCan v. Alameda CountyCounty of Butte v. Purcell
References
Case No. ADJ10826283
Regular
Mar 12, 2019

PETER HLINKA vs. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a finding of fact that an inmate was an employee of the County of Santa Barbara for workers' compensation purposes. The inmate voluntarily applied for and accepted a work assignment in the jail, which was not a condition of his incarceration. He received consideration in the form of better housing, food, and mobility, and the County's own resolution authorizing inmate work was permissive rather than compulsory. The Board also admonished the defendant for improperly citing an unpublished case.

Inmate EmploymentWorkers CompensationCounty JailVoluntary WorkConsiderationControlPenal Code 4017Rowland v. County of SonomaPruitt v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Labor Code 3351
References
Case No. ADJ8180265
Regular
Jun 27, 2016

CHAKA FERRELL vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

The Board denied the Defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that applicant sustained psychiatric injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment. The Board held that the department closure and employee transfers constituted general working conditions, not "personnel actions" as defined by Labor Code section 3208.3(h). Therefore, the Defendant failed to prove the claim was barred by the good faith personnel action defense. The Board also admonished defense counsel for unprofessional language used in the petition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPsychiatric injuryGood faith personnel actionLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Community improvement specialistSupplemental Findings and OrderPetition for ReconsiderationAdministrative law judgeLien claimantSouthland Spine and Rehabilitation
References
Case No. ADJ9320374
Regular
Jul 29, 2016

KURT KENDELL vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROBATION DEPARTMENT

This case concerns a county probation officer's claim for psychiatric injury. The applicant alleged his injury stemmed from perceived bad faith personnel actions by his supervisor, including excessive report editing and workload issues. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award, finding the medical evidence regarding causation and the "good faith personnel action" defense was insufficient. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record, potentially through an Agreed Medical Examiner or a court-appointed physician, to clarify the causal relationship and the nature of the employer's actions.

Psychiatric injuryGood faith personnel action defenseLabor Code section 3208.3(h)Predominant causeSubstantial evidencePanel Qualified Medical Examiner (PQME)Rolda analysisActual events of employmentLawful nondiscriminatoryMedical probability
References
Showing 1-10 of 2,800 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