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. ADJ6696775, ADJ7402305
Regular
Apr 27, 2012

ANDRICK COREY JACKSON vs. DENVER BRONCOS AND CLEVELAND BROWNS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a February 13, 2012 Findings and Award at the request of defendant Cleveland Browns. This action was taken due to statutory time constraints and a preliminary review indicating a need for further study of factual and legal issues. The Board seeks a complete understanding of the record to issue a just decision. Pending a Decision After Reconsideration, all filings must be submitted in writing to the WCAB Commissioners' office, not to district offices or through e-filing.

ADJ6696775ADJ7402305WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDANDRICK COREY JACKSONDENVER BRONCOSCLEVELAND BROWNSPermissibly Self-InsuredOPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Award
References
Case No. ADJ7763837
Regular
Jun 27, 2012

ANTHONY DORSETT vs. DENVER BRONCOS, DALLAS COWBOYS

The Denver Broncos petitioned to remove a workers' compensation case, arguing a prior settlement (ADJ4142902) barred the current claim (ADJ7763837) under res judicata. However, the Board denied the petition because the defendant failed to produce evidence of the prior settlement during discovery, preventing them from proving their claim. Therefore, the administrative law judge correctly continued the case to a status conference. The Board affirmed the ALJ's decision, denying the defendant's petition for removal.

Petition for RemovalRes JudicataCompromise and ReleaseDuplicative ClaimAdministrative Law JudgeAppeals BoardPrior ClaimIndustrial InjuryProfessional Football PlayerMandatory Settlement Conference
References
Case No. ADJ6579284
Regular
Oct 09, 2025

Paul Smith III vs. Denver Broncos Football, Great Divide Insurance Company

The Denver Broncos Football filed a petition for removal contesting a joinder order issued by a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ). The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition, the applicant's answer, and the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. The Board denied the petition for removal, emphasizing that removal is an extraordinary remedy. It concluded that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would not be an inadequate remedy if an adverse final decision were to be issued.

Petition for RemovalOrder of JoinderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationAdmitted EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceHolmberg
References
Case No. ADJ7231165
Regular
Jun 18, 2013

Cedrick Hordges, Charles Scott, Willie Wise, Hollis Copeland, Jr., Ralph Simpson, Jacky Dorsey, Walter Brown vs. Denver Nuggets, Pinnacol Assurance

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted Pinnacol Assurance's petitions for removal, finding the threshold issue to be whether the WCAB has personal jurisdiction over Pinnacol. The WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order compelling arbitration of coverage issues. All seven cases are returned to the trial level for a determination of personal jurisdiction over Pinnacol. Further proceedings will depend on the outcome of that jurisdictional decision.

Pinnacol AssuranceDenver NuggetsCedrick HordgesADJ7231165Petition for RemovalArbitrationLabor Code section 5275Insurance CoveragePersonal JurisdictionSpecial Appearance
References
Case No. ADJ8534090
Regular
Oct 10, 2025

EDDIE KENNISON III vs. DENVER BRONCOS, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY

Defendant filed a petition for removal from an election made by the applicant at a hearing on December 18, 2023. Subsequently, on March 18, 2024, the parties filed a petition to withdraw the petition for removal as they had entered into a Compromise and Release, which was approved on the same day. As a result, the petition for removal is dismissed because the issue has become moot.

Petition for RemovalCompromise and ReleaseMootAdjudication NumbersWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardVan Nuys District OfficeDismissalApplicantDefendant
References
Case No. ADJ9093456, ADJ9996405, ADJ9996406
Regular
Jan 19, 2023

OTTO STOWE vs. DALLAS COWBOYS, DENVER BRONCOS, LOS ANGELES RAMS, TRAVELERS, CIGA

This case involves an applicant seeking removal of a prior order, arguing prejudice from the denial of his Labor Code section 5500.5 election and refusal to allow evidence regarding a guardian ad litem. The Appeals Board granted removal, finding that the applicant's competency and need for a guardian ad litem must be determined before proceeding. Consequently, the prior order was rescinded, and the case was returned to the trial level for a hearing on the guardian ad litem issue.

Petition for RemovalGuardian ad LitemLabor Code section 5500.5Competency determinationRescinded OrderReturn to Trial LevelIncompetent injured workerWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative law judgePrejudice
References
Case No. ADJ9078233
Regular
Sep 21, 2022

DANIEL HUNTER vs. SHREVEPORT PIRATES, DENVER BRONCOS, SAN DIEGO CHARGERS, DALLAS COWBOYS, LOS ANGELES EXPRESS, LOUISIANA WORKERS COMPENSATION CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded its prior decision and returned the case to the arbitrator. The Board found that the arbitrator erred in considering whether the defendant insurer's policy, issued in Louisiana, could cover an out-of-state injury under California jurisdiction. The Board clarified that workers' compensation coverage is distinct from employer's liability coverage and that policy endorsements limiting coverage require the Insurance Commissioner's approval. The matter was returned for further proceedings and a new decision based on recent clarifying case law.

Louisiana Workers' Compensation CorporationShreveport Piratesout-of-state insuranceCalifornia jurisdictionworkers' compensation arbitratorinsurance contractLouisiana lawemployer's liability insuranceNational Counsel on Compensation InsuranceLa Jolla Beach & Tennis Club
References
Case No. ADJ13650693
Regular
Mar 15, 2023

KENNY LOFTON vs. CLEVELAND GUARDIANS, LOS ANGELES DODGERS, TEXAS RANGERS, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case concerns Kenny Lofton's workers' compensation claim against several baseball teams, including the Los Angeles Dodgers and Texas Rangers. The defendants sought reconsideration of the finding of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing the contracts were not made in California. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report. The judge found that oral agreements made in California while Lofton was physically present, even with some terms yet to be finalized, established sufficient connection for California jurisdiction. The ruling relies on California Labor Codes and established case law regarding contract formation for employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationSubject Matter JurisdictionContract of HireLabor Code Sections 3600.5Labor Code Section 5305Alaska PackersBowen v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Janzen v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Globe Cotton Oil Mills
References
Case No. ADJ7730913, ADJ8640698, ADJ8233287, ADJ7881756, ADJ8438104, ADJ7467140, ADJ7467243, ADJ9068351, ADJ9081983
Regular
Dec 02, 2016

HOLLIS COPELAND, JR. vs. DENVER NUGGETS, PINNACOL ASSURANCE

This case involved multiple consolidated workers' compensation claims where the Board initially denied reconsideration of an order dismissing Pinnacol Assurance for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Appeals Board is now granting reconsideration on its own motion to correct clerical errors in its prior opinion. Specifically, the Board failed to list all nine adjudication file numbers and did not serve all affected applicants. The decision after reconsideration affirms the original denial of reconsideration but amends the opinion to include all case numbers.

Appeals BoardGranting ReconsiderationOn MotionDecision After ReconsiderationClerical ErrorsPersonal JurisdictionPinnacol AssuranceConsolidated CasesAdjudication File NumbersAffirm Opinion
References
Case No. ADJ8424547
Regular
Feb 26, 2019

PAUL LOPEZ vs. BRONCO WINE COMPANY, ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves cross-petitions for reconsideration by the applicant and defendant regarding an administrative law judge's decision finding permanent total disability due to an industrial injury sustained by the applicant. The applicant argued the average weekly earnings were too low and disputed the medical impairment rating, while the defendant challenged the total disability finding and sought apportionment of disability. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both petitions, adopting the judge's report, and specifically noted that vocational evidence supported the finding of unemployability independent of any apportionment issues or prior felony conviction.

Industrial injuryKneesLumbar spinePsycheErectile dysfunctionAltered gaitPermanent total disabilityAverage weekly earningsVocational expertApportionment
References
Showing 1-10 of 14 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