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. ADJ3763910 (STK 0195200) ADJ6626980
Regular
Feb 06, 2015

JOHN ALARCON vs. PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC

This case involves an applicant seeking to modify deposition and Qualified Medical Evaluation (QME) orders due to alleged severe medical conditions. While the applicant agrees to the deposition and QME, they claim their health prevents travel and request these be held at their home. The Appeals Board granted the Petition for Removal, finding the medical record requires further development regarding the alleged travel limitations. The orders for deposition and QME are amended to defer the time and place, returning the matter to the trial level for proceedings on accommodation issues.

Petition for RemovalOrder Compelling DepositionQualified Medical Evaluation (QME)Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)Industrial InjuriesPolymyositisTreating PhysicianMedical ReportTravel LimitationsAccommodation
References
Case No. ADJ4052884 (AHM 0136124), ADJ6520242, ADJ7028149
Regular
Jul 20, 2016

EMILIO EDDIE ROMERO, SARA ROMERO vs. CLOROX PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

Defendant Clorox sought removal to the Appeals Board to review an order allowing a second deposition of the decedent's QME, arguing prejudice from delay. Defendant contended the applicant waived discovery rights and the issue should be the QME's report's evidentiary value. However, the QME's deposition subsequently occurred. Therefore, the Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Removal as moot and ordered the matter returned to the trial calendar.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRemovalPetition for RemovalQualified Medical EvaluatorQMEDepositionDiscoveryVacated OrderSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
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. ADJ3213121 (LBO 0361407)
Regular
Aug 30, 2010

GLENDA M. BRUCE vs. COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE, KEENAN & ASSOCIATES

The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, reversing a prior order that quashed the applicant's deposition. The applicant amended her claim to include hair loss and a fall after her last deposition. The Board found good cause for an additional deposition, as the defendant did not have notice of these new claims prior to the previous depositions. Therefore, the applicant is required to submit to a fifth deposition specifically addressing the hair loss and fall allegations.

Petition for RemovalQuashed DepositionCompensable ConsequencesAmended ApplicationIndustrial InjuryHair LossFallPrior NoticeFifth DepositionRescinded Order
References
Case No. ADJ7046175
Regular
Jun 07, 2013

, DAVID WILKIE, vs. , CHATEAU HOTEL, and FIRSTCOMP OMAHA for SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY,

This case involves an applicant's petition for removal to the Appeals Board, challenging a WCJ's denial of his petition to quash depositions. The applicant argued improper notice and service of deposition subpoenas, but the WCJ admitted the depositions solely for the purpose of determining timely notice, not for substantive evidence. The Appeals Board denied the removal petition because the applicant had not yet suffered prejudice or irreparable harm, as the depositions had not been used for substantive purposes and he could raise objections later if aggrieved.

Petition for RemovalQuash DepositionsCode of Civil ProcedureCCP section 2025.270Proper NoticeProof of ServiceIndustrial InjuryLeft Upper ExtremityFindings and OrderWCAB Rule 10843
References
Case No. ADJ6550136
Regular
Sep 17, 2012

Vanessa Ford vs. County of San Bernardino

The Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for removal, upholding the WCJ's disqualification of the Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME) due to ex parte communication during his deposition. The defendant's arguments that the deposition was permissible and that questions exceeded the medical issues were rejected. However, the Board clarified that the AME's prior reports remain admissible and the defendant may seek deposition costs.

Petition for RemovalAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)DisqualifiedEx Parte CommunicationDepositionQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Administrative DirectorPanel of NeurologistsWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
Case No. ADJ4067591 (VNO 0551402) ADJ4308603 (VNO 0559555)
Regular
Apr 12, 2011

MARIA BARAJAS vs. CONCERTO, INC., dba CITRON SPA, STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY

This case involves Dr. Herbert Marshak's petition for removal of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order compelling his deposition. The Board denied the petition, deeming removal an extraordinary remedy not warranted here. Marshak's claims that he was not a proper party to the deposition and that his due process rights were violated were rejected. The Board found his deposition had commenced and was continued, and he failed to object to the order compelling his attendance.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeDepositionNotice to ProduceJewish SabbathDue ProcessCompelling AttendanceSanctionsContempt Proceedings
References
Case No. ADJ8984860
Regular
Dec 30, 2020

AMADOR ORTIZ GARCIA vs. ISEC, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal of the WCJ's order quashing the deposition of Dr. Mouradian, an Agreed Medical Examiner. The Board found the record insufficient to evaluate the defendant's due process claim regarding the quashed deposition. Consequently, the order quashing the deposition was rescinded, and the case was returned to the WCJ for further proceedings. This decision allows for a proper review of the issues and evidence.

Petition for RemovalAgreed Medical ExaminerWCJDue ProcessQuashed DepositionReport and RecommendationDiscovery ClosureMandatory Settlement ConferenceFindings of FactAdmitted Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ6550105 ADJ6777358 ADJ6777361 ADJ6976802
Regular
Oct 03, 2014

ESTHER GARCIA vs. ANTELOPE VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, CORVEL CORPORATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded an earlier order allowing attorney fees. The Board found that Labor Code section 5710(b) only authorizes fees for depositions of the injured employee or their dependents, not for depositions of Qualified Medical Evaluators (QMEs). Therefore, applicant's counsel was not entitled to fees for attending the QME's deposition. The Board denied the petition for attorney's fees.

Labor Code $\S 5710$Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Attorney's FeesDepositionInjured EmployeeDependent BenefitsWCJContingency Fee
References
Case No. ADJ4189754 (ANA 0349061)
Regular
Mar 09, 2010

MICHAEL JACOBUS vs. AMERISERVE; CIGA, by its servicing facility, INTERCARE, for RELIANCE INSURANCE, in liquidation

In this case, the defendant sought removal to allow the deposition of a psychiatric AME and to forward applicant's deposition transcript to AMEs, arguing substantial prejudice. The Appeals Board granted removal, allowing the deposition transcript of Dr. Feldman to be offered into evidence. However, the Board deferred the issue of further supplemental reports from the AMEs to the trial judge. The matter was returned to the trial level to be set for trial and for further proceedings.

Removal petitionAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Donald Feldman M.D.Charles Rudner M.D.Deposition transcriptIndustrial injuryTruck driverLoader-unloaderLeft kneePsyche
References
Showing 1-10 of 381 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