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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ6875081
Regular
Oct 18, 2012

LOURDES MORENO vs. MELTON FRANCHISE SYSTEMS, INC.; dba COVERALL; EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case concerns Lourdes Moreno's claim for workers' compensation benefits following a back injury sustained while performing janitorial services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) reversed a prior finding that Moreno was an independent contractor, ruling instead that she was an employee of Melton Franchise Systems, Inc. (dba Coverall). The WCAB determined that Coverall exerted pervasive control over Moreno's work, dictating numerous aspects of her business operations beyond mere quality control, which indicated an employer-employee relationship. This decision shifts the responsibility for her injury from Moreno to Coverall for workers' compensation purposes.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndependent ContractorEmployee StatusFranchise AgreementRight to ControlJanitorial ServicesBorello TestSecondary IndiciaAdhesion ContractPervasive Control
References
Case No. ADJ2041648 (SDO 0319858) ADJ2762432 (SDO 0319859) ADJ772603 (SDO 0319860)
Regular

STACIE L. NELDAUGHTER vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of San Diego's petition for removal. The County sought to rescind a six-month continuance granted for the applicant, alleging prejudice and discovery abuses, but failed to demonstrate significant harm. The Board found the County's arguments insufficient to justify removal and returned the cases to the trial level. The PWCJ is to schedule a status conference after January 26, 2010, to determine if further continuance is warranted based on a "clear showing of good cause."

Petition for RemovalOrder Granting ContinuancePrejudiceIrreparable HarmADA AccommodationDisability CoordinatorContinued HearingStatus ConferenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery Abuses
References
Case No. ADJ3199594; ADJ522422; ADJ3307814
Regular
Oct 01, 2010

FRANCISCO GOMEZ vs. CONTROL AIR CONDITIONING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, VIRGINIA SURETY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an award for Applicant Francisco Gomez. The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge's report, which recommended denial. The applicant sustained a continuous trauma injury to his back, hypertension, and diabetes stemming from his employment. While the exact dates and extent of specific injuries remained pending further discovery, the judge found sufficient evidence for a compensable continuous trauma award.

WCABReconsideration DeniedAgreed Medical ExaminerContinuous TraumaIndustrial InjuryCausationCompensable ConsequenceHypertensionDiabetesLaminectomy
References
Case No. ADJ10223631
Regular
May 31, 2019

SOUNG UE KIM vs. ELITE 4 PRINT, INC., BENCHMARK INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB reconsidered an order regarding applicant's treatment outside the employer's Medical Provider Network (MPN). Applicant sought to continue treatment with a physician not in the MPN after the claim was initially denied and later accepted. The Board amended the prior order to clarify that applicant was "improperly" treating outside the MPN, finding that Labor Code section 4603.2(a)(2) does not apply when the employer exercises medical control after accepting the claim, absent a prior final determination of entitlement to an outside physician. One commissioner dissented, arguing the case should be remanded to determine if the employer's significant delays in accepting the claim constituted a failure to provide medical care, which would allow continued treatment outside the MPN.

MPNPetition for Reconsiderationbilateral upper extremity injuriesAdministrative Director Rule 9767.9Labor Code section 4603.2Agreed Medical Examinerprimary treating physicianAOE/COEtransfer of caremedical control
References
Case No. GOL 100978
Regular
Feb 14, 2008

JANETTE HOPE vs. TRI-COUNTIES REGIONAL CENTER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the judge's finding, concluding applicant was an employee of Tri-Counties Regional Center, not an independent contractor. The Board found the Center exercised sufficient control over the applicant's work, providing office space, supplies, and scheduling, which outweighed the contractual designation. The case is remanded for further proceedings to determine the applicant's entitlement to benefits.

Independent contractor vs. employeeIndustrial injuryMulti-system immunological problemsControl of workRight to controlSecondary factors of employmentDistinct occupationTools and suppliesMethod of paymentContractual designation
References
Case No. ADJ6520136
Regular
Jan 24, 2011

GARY HECK vs. L.A. DEPOSITIONS dba FIRST LEGAL COURIER, TOWER SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, administered by ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision that found the applicant was an independent contractor. The WCAB found the applicant was, in fact, an employee, reversing the administrative law judge's determination. Factors including the defendant's control over the applicant's work, the integral nature of the applicant's tasks to the defendant's business, and the applicant's lack of a true independent business weighed heavily in this decision. The WCAB emphasized that labels and self-serving documents do not override the reality of the employment relationship.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationEmployee vs. Independent ContractorBorello factorsControl testLabor Code Section 3351Labor Code Section 3353Labor Code Section 3357Independent Contractor ProfileEagle 1 Delivery
References
Case No. ADJ11706407
Regular
Apr 15, 2025

Matthew Hatchette vs. Oakland Raiders, TIG/Fairmont Premier Insurance Company, Jacksonville Jaguars, ACE American Insurance Company, New York Jets, USF&G, Chubb, Pacific Employers Insurance

This case concerns Matthew Hatchette, a former professional football player, and his claims of continuous trauma injuries against multiple NFL teams and their insurers. Defendant Jacksonville Jaguars filed a Petition for Reconsideration challenging the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) findings regarding jurisdiction and the applicability of res judicata. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the petition to conduct a thorough review of the factual and legal issues, thereby deferring a final decision on the merits. The Board's decision also addressed the timeliness of the petition under the recently amended Labor Code section 5909.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMatthew HatchetteOakland RaidersJacksonville JaguarsNew York JetsTIG/Fairmont Premier Insurance CompanyChubbUSF&GGallagher Bassett ServicesZenith Insurance Company
References
Case No. ADJ2073136 (LAO 0859208)
Regular
Dec 27, 2017

J ACQUELINE STELLY vs. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.

The applicant, Jacqueline Stelly, filed a Petition for Removal and an objection to a trial setting. Subsequently, at the scheduled hearing, both parties jointly requested and were granted a continuance. As a result of this continuance, the applicant's Petition for Removal became moot. Therefore, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal.

Petition for RemovalDismissedMootContinuanceObjection to Trial SettingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardADJ2073136LAO 0859208Pomona District OfficeVerizon Communications
References
Case No. GRO 0029923
Regular
Jun 23, 2008

MYCAH DILBECK vs. DAIRY CREEK GOLF COURSE RESTAURANT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied an applicant's petitions for disqualification and removal of the assigned judge. The applicant sought a new judge and a continuance, but the Board found the disqualification petition untimely and lacked evidence of bias. The Board also denied the removal petition, citing no prior request for continuance and sufficient time for the applicant to review case files.

WCABdisqualificationremovalpetitioncontinuancetimelyWCJmandatory settlement conferencepretrial conference statementLabor Code section 5502(e)(3)
References
Showing 1-10 of 986 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