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 The WCAB rescinded the decision and returned the case to the trial level, finding the medical opinions of Dr.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. ADJ6573692
Regular
May 09, 2016

Gloria Mares vs. 99 Cents Only Stores, Broadspire

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involved a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimants. The petition was dismissed because the lien claimants' representative, Frank Ureno, failed to file a proper Notice of Representation with the Board. This procedural defect, the failure to comply with notice requirements for representation, was grounds for dismissal. The Board also noted that the petition would have been denied on its merits if not for the procedural issue.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien claimantsNotice of RepresentationHearing RepresentativeCalifornia Code of Regulations 10774.5DismissalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportUn-numbered pagesOrder Dismissing Lien Balance
References
Case No. Misc. No. 257
Significant

vs. Javier Jimenez

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of intention to suspend Javier Jimenez's privilege to appear as a representative for 180 days, citing a pattern of bad-faith tactics, frivolous actions, and repeated failure to comply with sanction orders.

Labor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionWCAB en bancSanctionsBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayLien claimantsLabor Code section 5700 agentRepeated misconduct
References
Case No. ADJ7379899
Regular
Nov 12, 2012

DARRIN LANNING vs. BAYWOOD INTERIORS, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's contention that the WCJ erred by deeming the post-termination defense moot. The Board clarified that Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) provides a defense against claims filed after termination or layoff, and this issue is not moot if an industrial injury is found. Consequently, the Board rescinded the prior findings and returned the case for further proceedings to determine if the post-termination defense applies and, if so, whether applicant meets any exceptions. The merits of the original finding of industrial injury were not decided and are subject to a new ruling after the post-termination defense is resolved.

AOE/COEpost-termination defenseLabor Code section 3600(a)(10)industrial injurycabinetmakerlower backleft groinright kneemootfindings of fact
References
Case No. ADJ6751788
Regular
Aug 16, 2010

MOISES ROBLES GARCIA vs. ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a finding of industrial injury for applicant Moises Robles Garcia. Defendant Able Building Maintenance argued the applicant failed to prove injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) and raised affirmative defenses of intoxication and material deviation. The Board rescinded the original decision and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings, specifically to determine AOE/COE and consider the applicant's credibility and deposition transcripts. The WCJ must now make a determination on AOE/COE and potentially other defenses.

AOE/COEintoxication defensematerial deviationexcluded evidencedeposition transcriptswitness demeanorcredibilitypreponderance of the evidencecausal connectionrational incident of work
References
Case No. ADJ4534638
Regular
May 03, 2018

HERLINDO LOERA vs. FOSTER FARMS

This case involves a Petition for Removal that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied. The WCAB stated that removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration is typically an adequate remedy. Based on the administrative law judge's analysis, the WCAB found neither condition was met. The WCAB also clarified that only the Board, not an administrative law judge, has the authority to remove a representative's privilege to appear in proceedings.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationLabor Code section 4907privilege to appearrepresentativenonattorney representative
References
Case No. ADJ394613 (VNO 0530712); ADJ2266356 (VNO 0530710)
Regular
Jun 25, 2015

MARIA ESTRELLA vs. DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES/NATIONAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, FIDELITY AND GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a Petition for Removal filed by a lien claimant. The lien claimant argued substantial prejudice due to the employer's non-attorney representative. However, the Board found that the non-attorney representative complied with relevant regulations, and the lien claimant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, removal was deemed an extraordinary remedy not warranted in this case, with reconsideration serving as an adequate remedy if necessary.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ ReportSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationRule 10773Non-Attorney RepresentativeHearing RepresentativeLien Claimant
References
Case No. ADJ10014571
Regular
Oct 19, 2017

FERNANDO SANCHEZ vs. PACIFIC ALLOY CASTING COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a prior award finding applicant sustained industrial injuries to his knees, spine, and upper extremities. The defendant argued the claim was barred by the post-termination defense under Labor Code §3600(a)(10). However, the Board found the applicant's brief absences for pain did not constitute "compensable disability" prior to termination, thus triggering an exception to the defense. Therefore, the applicant's date of injury was determined to be subsequent to termination notice, and the claim is not barred.

post-termination defenseLabor Code §3600(a)(10)date of injurysection 5412compensable disabilitytemporary disabilitypermanent disabilitycumulative traumaorthopedic panel QMEbilateral knees
References
Case No. ADJ3953416
Regular
Mar 07, 2013

CLENNON MOORE vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, TRISTAR

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for removal, finding no significant prejudice or irreparable harm from the WCJ's order vacating a trial date. The Board also denied the defendant's petition to remove the applicant's non-attorney representative, Danny Boyd, from appearing, despite Boyd's history of abusive conduct. However, the Board issued a stern warning to Boyd that future misconduct will result in proceedings to remove his privilege to represent parties. The Board noted Boyd's potential violation of paralegal regulations and advised him to ensure compliance.

WCABPetition for RemovalHearing RepresentativeLabor Code Section 4907Cease and Desist OrderAbusive ConductNon-attorney RepresentativeSB 899Labor Code Section 5814Medical Mileage
References
Case No. ADJ11332263
Regular
Jul 22, 2019

ERIKA MEDINA vs. THE BICYCLE CASINO, LP, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

This case involves an applicant alleging cumulative trauma injury to multiple body parts while employed by The Bicycle Casino. The trial judge found injury AOE/COE to several body parts, but the defendant sought reconsideration, arguing insufficient evidence and improper exclusion of a post-termination defense. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the medical record needed further development regarding causation, particularly with the QME. They also ruled that the WCJ acted within discretion by not permitting the post-termination defense to be raised at trial without prior proper notice.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderWCJPost-termination defenseQMECredibility determinationSubstantial evidenceCumulative traumaMedical opinion
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,361 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