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. ADJ6712588
Regular
Aug 12, 2010

MARIA NAVARRO vs. STAFF CHEX, AIG INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration for Applicant Maria Navarro, rescinding a prior award. The Board found a potential due process violation because the Applicant claimed she was never served with the Disability Evaluation Unit's (DEU) rating. As the DEU rating was not found in the official record of proceedings, the Board returned the case for further proceedings, ordering the DEU rating be properly added to the record and served on all parties. This ensures the Applicant has an opportunity to challenge the rating and exercise her due process rights.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityDue ProcessNoticeCross-examinationDisability Evaluation UnitDEUProof of Service
References
5
Case No. VNO 514162, VNO 514164, VNO 514165, VNO 542022
Regular
Mar 17, 2008

MIA DOEVE vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves an applicant who sustained multiple admitted industrial injuries while employed as a deputy sheriff. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the WCJ's finding of 0% permanent disability was not adequately supported by the evidence, particularly the DEU rater's conclusions. The Board rescinded the prior award and returned the case for further proceedings, including cross-examination of the DEU rater and reconsideration of which permanent disability rating schedule applies.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeputy SheriffIndustrial InjuriesPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical Evaluator1997 Schedule2005 ScheduleLabor Code Section 4061Wilkinson doctrineDisability Evaluation Unit
References
3
Case No. ADJ6544795
Regular
Mar 28, 2011

JENNIFER GONZALEZ vs. CAL POLY POMONA ASI, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

This case involves a defendant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award due to a due process violation. The administrative law judge issued a decision without allowing the defendant to object to or cross-examine the Disability Evaluation Unit (DEU) rater. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the matter to the trial level. This is to allow the defendant the opportunity to cross-examine the DEU evaluator, thereby ensuring due process.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardDEU RatingCross-examinationDisability Evaluation UnitDue ProcessIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityMedical Treatment
References
4
Case No. ADJ3057272 (RDG 0125821)
Regular
Dec 03, 2010

FIDEL NAZARENO vs. OLD DURHAM WOOD COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a defendant's petition for reconsideration of a permanent disability award, arguing the Agreed Medical Evaluator's (AME) impairment rating was inconsistent with AMA Guides. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the award, and returned the matter for further development of the record. Issues include the DEU rater improperly separating AME's combined whole person impairment and the AME needing to clarify his reasoning on grip loss and potential overlap with other impairments. The AME will also re-evaluate impairment without referencing prior DEU ratings.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDAgreed Medical EvaluatorAMEpermanent disabilityAMA GuidesDEU raterrating instructionswhole person impairmentFindings and AwardPetition for Reconsideration
References
1
Case No. ADJ892742 (SJO 0240973) MF ADJ6718849
Regular
Jul 21, 2000

SALLY MACKIN vs. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS

Here's a summary of the case for a lawyer in four sentences: The applicant sought reconsideration of a WCJ's decision finding industrial injuries to her shoulders, neck, and wrists, resulting in 43% and 9% permanent disability respectively, and awarded future medical treatment but denied claims for hypertension and psychological injury. Applicant contended the WCJ erred in permanent disability ratings, the application of the PDRS, and the DEU rater's methodology. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found the 1997 PDRS was not applicable to the cumulative injury and that the DEU rater acted within her expertise. A dissenting commissioner argued the 1997 PDRS should apply to the cumulative injury and that the record needed further development regarding permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSally MackinSanta Clara County FairgroundsADJ892742ADJ6718849Findings Awards and Orderspermanent disabilitycumulative injuryhypertension injuryfuture medical treatment
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. State of New York Department of Corrections

Plaintiff Melvin Davis, an African-American correction officer at Fishkill Correctional Facility, sued his employer DOCCS and coworkers Keith Canfield and James McAnney for hostile work environment under Title VII and § 1983, and for retaliation under Title VII. Davis alleged three incidents: a bag remnant and twine resembling a noose, a toy rat with a noose outside his apartment, and racist graffiti in the workplace restroom. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding that the bag remnant did not objectively resemble a noose, the toy rat incident could not be attributed to the defendants, and DOCCS took appropriate remedial action regarding the graffiti. Consequently, the court concluded that the incidents were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile work environment, and the retaliation claim also failed due to lack of attributable adverse action.

DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationSummary JudgmentCorrection OfficerWorkplace HarassmentRacial DiscriminationCivil RightsTitle VIISection 1983
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Microtech Contracting Corp. v. Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York

Plaintiff Microtech Contracting Corporation sought a preliminary injunction to stop defendants, including the Mason Tenders District Council and Local 78, from displaying an inflatable rat at its work sites. Microtech argued this conduct violated a 'no-strike' provision in their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The District Court denied the motion, citing a lack of jurisdiction under the Norris-LaGuardia Act because the underlying labor dispute was not subject to mandatory arbitration as per the CBA. The court also held that Section 104 of the Act specifically prohibits injunctions against publicizing labor disputes by non-fraudulent or non-violent means. Furthermore, the court determined that even if jurisdiction existed, the use of the inflatable rat was protected First Amendment speech and did not fall under the 'disruptive activity' clause of the CBA, which was interpreted to apply only to actions similar to work stoppages.

labor disputepreliminary injunctionNorris-LaGuardia Actcollective bargaining agreementFirst Amendmentinflatable ratunion protestno-strike clausearbitrabilityjurisdiction
References
22
Case No. ADJ2266211 (GOL 0101534)
Regular
Dec 28, 2009

Miles Wallace vs. BELLAGIO & BACK DOOR BOARD SHOP, CNA CLAIMPLUS for VALLEY FORGE (PORTLAND)

Reconsideration granted; case returned to trial level to re-rate applicant's permanent disability and address other issues due to inadequate explanation of the basis of the original decision and lack of cross-examination of the DEU rater.

Permanent Disability RatingOccupational Group NumberFactors of DisabilityWork RestrictionsDEU RaterCross-examinationMedical ReportingWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings and AwardReconsideration
References
1
Case No. AHM 0136908
Regular
Mar 07, 2008

JUAN JESUS GARCIA vs. ALEXIS CONSTRUCTION CLEANUP INC., GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, AIG CLAIMS SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the prior award of no permanent disability. The Board found that the medical reports were not ratable by the Disability Evaluation Unit. The case is returned to the trial level to allow examination of the DEU rater, aiming to develop the record and ensure a decision on the merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAlexis Construction Cleanup Inc.Granite State Insurance CompanyAIG Claims ServicesJuan Jesus Garcialabor contractindustrial injuryback injurypermanent disabilityratable permanent disability
References
4
Case No. ADJ3107039 (SAL 0114548) ADJ1050422 (SAL 0104052)
Regular
Jan 19, 2012

ESTELA LUIS vs. COMMUNITY BRIDGES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an Amended Findings and Award, affirming the judge's decision. The Board rejected a request to increase the applicant's attorney's fee due to untimeliness and failure to provide required notice to the applicant. The defendant's petition for reconsideration was denied because they failed to meet their burden to rebut the DEU's use of a 4.6% COLA for calculating permanent disability and attorney fees, as it's a reasonable methodology based on a 50-year average.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAmended Findings and Awardattorney's feeuntimelyWCAB Rule 10778independent counseljurisdictionCost of Living Adjustment (COLA)State Average Weekly Wage (SAWW)
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 25 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